Tourist-Class Soyuz Spacecraft Seats Open

brandido writes "Put another notch in the belt for space tourism - Space.com is reporting that: "If you're looking for the ultimate in get-up-and go, take note: Tourist-class seats will be available on a Soyuz spacecraft bound for the International Space Station in 2004-2005. This off-planet trek comes courtesy of a deal struck between Space Adventures, a U.S. adventure travel firm, Russia's RSC Energia and the Russian Space Agency (Rosoviakosmos)." However, NASA has yet to be officially notified or to give formal approval, so there are still some speed bumps in the road map."

Comments

What's it matter?

[DrLudicrous]

None of us mere ./ mortals will ever be able to afford this, unless your name is BillGates or some other such fantastically rich nerd.

Re:What's it matter?

[bsharitt]

From the way your post is worded it sounds like you're calling Bill gates a /.er, people have been hanged for such blasphemy.

Re:What's it matter?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep.. none of you dotslash mortals will ever be able to afford it.. but I, as a slashdot mortal, already can!

Re:What's it matter?

[DrLudicrous]

lol... i didn't notice that. and no, I know BillGates is not a /.er.

Re:What's it matter?

[Anonymous Coward]

It just goes to show you how important correct punctuation is. If he put a period before the 'unless' instead of a comma his post would have been fine.

Re:What's it matter?

[Anonymous Coward]

it wouldn't make a difference. since what follows the period would not be a complete sentence, it would still be interpreted as a comma for which a period was substituted for stylistic reasons.

Re:What's it matter?

[Anonymous Coward]

you will soon get a list of names in the email.
give $100,000 to each of the people on the list.
remove the top name on the list, add your name on the bottom. send that list to 10 people you know.
Eventually, we'll all get to go.

Re:What's it matter?

[The Cydonian]

Doh, of course he is.

Re:What's it matter?

[Nermal6693]

And somehow I don't find this at all surprising.

Re:What's it matter?

[The Cydonian]

Waddya know, the trolls have mastered the Art of Zen!

YHBT?

[Bame Flait]

HAND?

I may have lost, but I clearly have not Failed.

I now hold up my anti-vomit umbrella.

typical

[curtlewis]

There's one problem and everyone freaks out (shuttle disaster) and there's a stop to everything for a while until it all settles down. After that, everything returns to normal.

Space travel is dangerous. Explosions WILL happen. Review of procedures should be constant and thorough (that's a no-brainer). After any disaster, downtime should be minimal, not excessive due to overreaction and political correctness.

With that said, I'm accepting VISA/MC (sorry, no Discover cards) for donations to my fund for a seat on the shuttle. :)

Re:typical

[geekoid]

"Explosions WILL happen."

I hope so, otjerwise the ship will just sit on the launch pad... :)

Re:typical

[Tekdemon]

Nah, if something horrible happens and the shuttles blow up, or maybe there's a disease breakout on the space station(Space SARS!) and terrorists blow up a wing of the space station, then we'll see REALLY CHEAP SPACE FARES! Yes, a horribly bad joke about the current state of airline fares. But that's probably the only way regular people will be able to afford to go to space for QUITE a while.

Re:typical

[theTerribleRobbo]

This is a bad Apollo 1 joke waiting to happen.

Re:typical

[watzinaneihm]

I dont think rocket propellants are really classified as explosives.They burn to produce all gases, and so can provide thrust but their burn rate is not very high (atleast solid propellants). You can safely hold a lit stick of solid propellant stick like a roman candle.
Or maybe I didnt understand your joke.

Re:typical

[jjhlk]

I agree, downtime should be limited to figuring out what went wrong. Shit happens.

shoot...

[LBArrettAnderson]

and to think i just spent my life savings on a pair of shoes... better start saving up again

Re:shoot...

[Anonymous Coward]

no, you stupid moderators are too full of yourselves if you mod that down offtopic. basically what he just said was "i'm too poor, i'm sure you're also too poor, so this doesn't really matter". it's "funny" not "offtopic"

NASA's approval?

[arth1]

Forgive me if I ask something stupid, but why would this need NASA's approval?

Re:NASA's approval?

[EvilBuu]

Well once you're up there, are they really going to make you sit in the Soyuz until they need to send it back? Don't those things usually stay up for a while to act as emergency vehicles or somesuch?

Re:NASA's approval?

[WIAKywbfatw]

Forgive me if I ask something stupid, but why would this need NASA's approval?

Because the International Space Station is just that - an international space station. NASA is one of the lead partners in the project and, as such, any missions/visits/whatever to the ISS must first be green stamped by NASA.

It's a bit like a shared cabin in the country - you ask the permission of the other owners, as much out of courtesy as anything else, before you head down there for the weekend.

Re:NASA's approval?

[Mondoz]

Forgive me if I ask something stupid, but why would this need NASA's approval?

They're selling seats to go to the International Space Station. NASA owns much of it. It's an enclosed space, so the tourist would be using resources provided partially by NASA...

The tourist could also do quite a bit of damage very easily... Without proper training by NASA, lots of bad stuff could easily happen...

Re:NASA's approval?

[The_dev0]

Just out of interest, does NASA have to ask anyone's permission to visit the ISS? Do they give the other countries involved in the ISS the same courtesy?

Re:NASA's approval?

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you ask you wife/girlfriend/roommate permission to go into your house?

Re:NASA's approval?

[Mondoz]

So far, all Shuttle passengers have been NASA Astronauts and Russian Cosmonauts, with joint NASA/Russian training.
NASA hasn't tried to put someone up that Russia has had problems with yet...
I'm sure that if NASA found a way to charge people for rides, Russia would throw a fit until they got a cut of the money.

Re:NASA's approval?

[RazzleFrog]

If you read the article it repeatedly refers to NASA and the other international partners. NASA just happens to be what is the largest and most well known space administration.

No reason to start an anti-American thread for this.

Re:NASA's approval?

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you ask your mother's permission to use her computer?

Re:NASA's approval?

[Anonymous Coward]

At this point I would think they would be happy to get anyone up there to do anything. The current ISS crew is only two people(Commander Yuri Malenchenko and Flight Engineer Ed Lu). Last I heard the station needed 3 people just to take care of the maintenance items (3people leaves a whopping 1.5 hours per week total to do any 'science' stuffs). The conversation should go like this;

*ring* *ring*
NASA: Hello, good morning NASA how can we help you today?
SpaceAdventures: Hi, We have two suckers, hrm, *cough* 'tourists' who want to go to the ISS on one of these spiffy Soyuz economy spacecrafts we have purchased payload space on from the russians.
NASA: uh, haven't you guys read the press releases? We don't want anyone up there who isn't super perfect in every single way. So, NO.
SpaceAdventures: Oh, come on. We know you guys want to have a few extra hands up there for a few days...
NASA: Remember, we didn't want you guys bringing Dennis Tito up there because he said some things we didn't like and that hurt our feelings even if he was right about what he said.
SpaceAdventures: oh, well, sorry about that but...they each paid us $20 million US for the ride and Tito didn't break anything remember? You guys made us put him in timeout in the Soyuz capsule most of the time anyways. Besides the French space guys in charge at the ESA said it was ok because it is an 'international' space station.
NASA: oh there you go again, pointing out the word 'international' in the name of the station, we asked you to stop calling it that we call it 'freedom'.
SpaceAdventures: well, the 15 other nations said it was cool too and we promised the russians a 50%split on the profits which is about 15% of their annual space budget.
NASA: oh they did huh? 15% huh?
SpaceAdventures: As a matter of fact they did.
NASA: $20 million each hrm... can they do windows and operate a vacuum?
SpaceAdventures: No. These folks are super rich. They don't know how to do those kinds of manual labor...
NASA: oh, allright...

Re:NASA's approval?

[ndinsil]

In a word, yes. All flights to the station are planned years in advance, even to which orbiter for Shuttle flights. The planning is coordinated among all involved space agencies. As long as the crew of manned flights (typically selected at least a year in advance) are all astronauts/cosmonauts, there isn't a problem with who exactly is going. Tourists are not a usual case and it's entirely reasonable to expect everyone to sign off on it. Since NASA has never tried to send a tourist, the case you describe is untested, but in principle would be analogous to this one.

Re:NASA's approval?

[Richard_at_work]

Depends on the mission, as there is usually a Soyuz already docked at the ISS. Sometimes the mission includes rotation of that soyuz, and the return crew come down in that one, while the new one remains, or sometimes the return crew return in the one that jsut docked.

Re:NASA's approval?

[meringuoid]

To be honest, though, what are NASA going to do?
NASA: 'No, sorry, we can't let you take paying passengers to the ISS.'
Russians: 'You mean like your astronauts?'

Re:NASA's approval?

[boots@work]

all Shuttle passengers have been NASA Astronauts and Russian Cosmonauts

Uh, no. There have been at least one Australian and one Israeli passenger on the shuttle, and probably other nationalities.

Are you sure?

[lseltzer]

I don't see it on Expedia

In relation to an earlier story

[Goldberg's Pants]

See, this is the perfect way to get rid of Senator Hatch and his "I'm going to destroy your PC" brigade.

Re:In relation to an earlier story

[WIAKywbfatw]

Ever read the Ben Elton novel Stark?

Basically, in the novel, the Earth is nearing ecological meltdown and the food chain has become compromised. To escape from hell on Earth and certain death on a dying planet, the filthy rich implement a plan to launch themselves into space and self-sustainability in space.

However, in a cruel twist of fate, they find that although they can escape the pollution on Earth, they can't escape the pollution in their souls.

Senator Hatch, Hilary Rosen and the SCO board spring immediately to mind (as well as a raft of other political figures, from the US and around the world), when I think of people I'd launch into orbit now so that the rest of us can live more freely and cleanly today.

Re:In relation to an earlier story

[The_dev0]

OT, but did you ever see the BBC (or might have been ABC) television adaptation of this excellent book? I bought the video about 8 years ago, and I don't think I've ever met anybody else that has seen it. Some excellent Australian actors are in it, and Ben Elton is as funny as ever.

Re:In relation to an earlier story

[rodgerd]

And if Ben Elton were actually funny, it would have been a great book...

Re:In relation to an earlier story

[Mac Degger]

What, you didn't like Black Adder? Or The Thin Blue Line? Or any of the many other series he (co)wrote?

Wow...

Re:In relation to an earlier story

[JimPooley]

What about Ben Elton's musical based on the songs of Queen? Or his musical (coming soon) based on the songs of Rod Stewart. Or his musical about football?

Ben Elton - Unfunny arsehole.

Re:In relation to an earlier story

[The_dev0]

The Young Ones!

Re:In relation to an earlier story

[cardshark2001]

See, this is the perfect way to get rid of Senator Hatch and his "I'm going to destroy your PC" brigade.

You know, until just now, none of my fantasies have ever involved an airlock.

Re:In relation to an earlier story

[Goldberg's Pants]

Yep, seen it. Excellent show. My main endearing memory of it is of the old guy shooting up heroin, saying it's fine "because it's pure".

Re:In relation to an earlier story

[madmarcel]

Having seen the TV adaptation (and read most of his books) only one question remains:

Is it me or does it seem that the ending to each of his books seems...eh...rushed? Or is he trying to give his books these meaningful endings that I just don't get? I think he's a good writer...but I've yet to find a book if his where the ending does not suck.

(The TV adaptation was a bit so so btw ;)

GOATSE TROLL BACK FROM 5 DAY HIATUS

[Anonymous Coward]

*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*
g_______________________________________________g
o_/_____\_____________\____________/____\_______o
a|_______|_____________\__________|______|______a
t|_______`._____________|_________|_______:_____t
s`________|_____________|________\|_______|_____s
e_\_______|_/_______/__\\\___--___\\_______:____e
x__\______\/____--~~__________~--__|_\_____|____x
*___\______\_-~____________________~-_\____|____*
g____\______\_________.--------.______\|___|____g
o______\_____\______//_________(_(__>_\___|_____o
a_______\___.__C____)_________(_(____>_|__/_____a
t_______/\_|___C_____)/______\_(_____>_|_/______t
s______/_/\|___C_____)_______|__(___>_/__\______s
e_____|___(____C_____)\______/__//__/_/_____\___e
x_____|____\__|_____\\_________//_(__/_______|__x
*____|_\____\____)___`----___--'_____________|__*
g____|__\______________\_______/____________/_|_g
o___|______________/____|_____|__\____________|_o
a___|_____________|____/_______\__\___________|_a
t___|__________/_/____|_________|__\___________|t
s___|_________/_/______\__/\___/____|__________|s
e__|_________/_/________|____|_______|_________|e
x__|__________|_________|____|_______|_________|x
*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*


The perineum is the area of skin rich in nerve endings that is located below the anus (the opening for bowel movements). For men, the perineum extends to the vaginal opening; for women it extends to the base of the testicles.

Because the perineum is so rich in nerve endings it often feels pleasing to have it touched or stroked. If one is comfortable with being touched on the perineum, its stimulation can be incorporated into a couple's lovemaking to further enhance sexual arousal.

To make stimulation smoother and more comfortable, it is often helpful to lubricate your fingers before stroking the perineum during lovemaking.

As long as the stimulation remains outside the body on the perineum, any type of lubricant (petroleum-base or water-base) will do.

However, because this kind of stimulation is often associated with insertion of the finger into the vagina or anus, or both, a water-base lubricant is recommended and preferred.

The anus is rich in nerve endings & participates with your genitals in the contractions of sexual arousal & orgasm. Anal stimulation greatly enhances & intensifies masturbation, oral sex, or intercourse. A good rule of thumb, when experimenting with anal play, is relax, use plenty of lube (the anus & rectum do not produce any lubrication of their own), and enjoy.

Because the perineum is so rich in nerve endings it often feels pleasing to have it touched or stroked. If one is comfortable with being touched on the perineum, its stimulation can be incorporated into a couple's lovemaking to further enhance sexual arousal.

The vagina is rich in vulvatic sensor spots & cooperates with your clitoral system in the up and down movements of sexual arousal & orgasm. Vaginal stimulation greatly enhances & multiplies masturbation, perienium stimulation, and orgies. A good rule of thumb, when experimenting with vaginal stimulation, is to relax, and use one quart of 10W30 (the vagina produces no lubrication of its own during normal stimulation), and enjoy.

However, because this kind of stimulation is often associated with insertion of the finger into the vagina or anus, or both, a water-base lubricant is recommended and preferred.

[ Reply to This ]

• Re: What the hell are you thinking? by JJahn (Score:2) Friday May 30, @09:06AM

1 reply beneath your current thresh

Does anyone else

[tmark]

find it disgusting that companies and countries are sending people up for profit to a space station that was funded by taxpayer dollars intended ostensibly for research ? Does anyone find it disturbing that lives of astronauts could possibly be jeopardized by having relatively untrained personnel on board ?

Re:Does anyone else

[SkArcher]

Money is money, if more money can be raised for scientific research by sending rich idiot tourists up in space, then so be it.

And if you are that concerned, consider that the other option is more of your tax dollars going up in space.

And it probably isn't any more dangerous than having a small child strapped into the back seat of a car.

Re:Does anyone else

[Niche Slasher]

The fact is probably that taxpayer money isn't enough to fund those research projects anymore and they need more bored-out-of-their-mind-on-earth billionaires to take money out as 'conditioned donations'. The many of the past failures of the NASA spaceshuttle program was blamed at least partially on inadequate funding because NASA had to move fund from the spaceshuttle program to help fund other smaller projects. If the money, at least some of them, can be used to help provide safer spaceshuttle program and hopefully save the lives of at least some astronauts, then I'd deem it worthwhile. As for those 'untrained' passengers, I bet spaceshuttle providers will certainly not let anybody they deemed unsafe or a possible operation hazard onboard no matter how much they pay for the ticket--which is in no ways comparable to the cost of the entire shuttle itself and the lives of everybody else onboard. So, yup, no baby onboard sir.

-N

Re:Does anyone else

[Anonymous Coward]

People blame Russia for starting this, but remember America did with their teacher and Challenger.

Re:Does anyone else

[Waffle Iron]

Money is money, if more money can be raised for scientific research by sending rich idiot tourists up in space, then so be it.

Space tourist tickets have recently been selling for $2e+7. ISS cost ~= $1e+11. At those prices, you'd have to send up 50,000 tourists just to pay for the amusement park, ignoring the cost of gas and a ride.

With the bloated costs of running the ISS, there is no way that the presence of an extra tourist on the ISS is not somehow costing the U.S. taxpayers more than what he paid the Russians for the ticket.

And if you are that concerned, consider that the other option is more of your tax dollars going up in space.

You're neglecting the best option, which would be for the current crew to initiate the self-destruct sequence and bail out. This would free up enough money to launch dozens of unmanned probes to unexplored parts of the solar system.

Re:Does anyone else

[mlong]

find it disgusting that companies and countries are sending people up for profit to a space station that was funded by taxpayer dollars intended ostensibly for research ? Does anyone find it disturbing that lives of astronauts could possibly be jeopardized by having relatively untrained personnel on board ?

I find it more disturbing that NASA has crippled the station. A three person crew who does nothing but maintenance. Little to no research. With my tax payer money. Yippe

Re:Does anyone else

[Mondoz]

People blame Russia for starting this, but remember America did with their teacher and Challenger.

The Teacher in Space program was an educational program. She didn't buy a ticket to go on a ride in a rocket...

The Russians are only trying to make money.

Re:Does anyone else

[Moofie]

This is the only way that those vaunted taxpayers would ever be able to experience the fruits of their dollars first-hand.

NASA has for many years made space travel the purview of the technological elite. Now it's within the realm of the financial elite, which is a step in the right direction. (Specifically, the directon of allowing more people to experience space travel)

Re:Does anyone else

[73939133]

I find that far less disgusting than having media companies monopolize the public airwaves, or energy companies corrupting our government. As far as taxpayer money wasted on private projects goes, it is also far less significant.

If you still don't like it, just think of it as "foreign aid". We are quite stingy anyway when it comes to foreign aid, so a little more money going to the Russian space program through this indirect route seems pretty defensible to me.

Re:Does anyone else

[Mondoz]

I find it more disturbing that NASA has crippled the station. A three person crew who does nothing but maintenance. Little to no research. With my tax payer money. Yippe

Upon completion, the station was to support a 7 man crew. However, Bush decided that the station didn't really need the escape vehicle and sleeping quarters required to support 7 people, so he cut the funding for those two modules.

The station's new 'complete' status will only support 3 people... about the number required for absolute minimal science and maintenance.

Blame Bush. He took away the funding.

Re:Does anyone else

[Mac Degger]

Hell, I know /I/ am :(

Re:Does anyone else

[Mac Degger]

No, the 'teacher in space' program was a PR program. Anyway, what do you think she would have done up there...more than Tito did?

Re:Does anyone else

[MisterMook]

Oh puh-leeze....If we're ever going to get off this piece of crap we call Earth in a serious way we're going to need taxpayer dollars mailing bums to Mars eventually. The Russians are EXACTLY right, and probably the Chinese too once they get their program up and running. NASA as an institution has got all the know-how, but the American public just doesn't have the guts or ambition to send people into space really. All the other countries have better reasons to engage in their space programs, capital to keep it running and finding a place on Mars for all those horny Chinamen comes to mind.

What do we want with OUR space program? We want to pat ourselves on the back for having the prettiest rockets and things we did 30 years ago. We want our shuttles to be safer than the downtown bus, driven by Tang commercials. We're happy to look at pretty pictures from Hubble while we bomb third world countries, instead of spending the money to actually DO something in space besides add to our comfort level down here on the dirt. NASA's like the kid who never gets up the courage to ask the girl to dance, but gets mad when someone else asks first.

Re:Does anyone else

[sql*kitten]

Blame Bush. He took away the funding.

No, blame NASA for overspending earlier in the project. NASA wanted a blank cheque from the taxpayer. If NASA demonstrated the ability to bring large projects in on time and within budget, they'd find it a lot easier to get money from the appropriations committee. All Bush said was look, we can't keep giving you more and more money if you can't show us anything for it.

Re:Does anyone else

[sql*kitten]

We are quite stingy anyway when it comes to foreign aid

• US largest donor in Liberia
  
• US largest donor in Ethiopia
  
• US largest donor in Uganda
  

The US is many things, but stingy with foreign aid it is not.

Re:Does anyone else

[Daniel Boisvert]

...if you know of a way to precisely estimate the costs and timeframe of a job no human being on earth has ever done before, might I suggest a future in project management for you?

This flame is directed towards the appropriations committees much moreso than to the previous poster (do any congress-critters read slashdot? :). The idea that the folks at NASA can predict with even any minor degree of accuracy what it's going to take to perform the feats they do suggests to me that they're damn good at their jobs.

How many times on a daily basis do you realize that you just spent $N of your employer's money discovering about 2,000 different methods that won't solve the problem you're trying to solve? Of course this can be minimized by hiring competent folks, good troubleshooters, etc., but when your business is to "go where no man has gone before", I'd guess that gets a bit more difficult. The challenge must be thrilling, but I think we'd get much farther as a species/nation if the budget folks would try to appreciate NASA's charter, and not only it's budget...

What it comes down to...

[SkArcher]

1) Oportunity
2) ???
3) Profit!

Ultimately, if it puts cash into the space program, im all for some rich idiots paying stupid ammounts of cash for it.

Re:What it comes down to...

[Heartz]

This just beats me but can somebody tell me how the

1) Opportunity 2) ???? 3) Profit!

became so popular on slashdot? Like who started the whole thing?

Re:What it comes down to...

[russellh]

between opportunity and profit is action.

If I've learned nothing else

[A Proud American]

I've learned never to trust a Russian.

In other news..

[djupedal]

'However, NASA has yet to be officially notified or to give formal approval, so there are still some speed bumps in the road map.'

Las Vegas odds makers are giving 2-to-1 that NASA will find a way to much it up...

Re:In other news..

[isorox]

Las Vegas odds makers are giving 2-to-1 that NASA will find a way to much it up

Hmm, the shuttle aint launching for another 6 months, at best. I'm guessing they'll be a crew changeover before then - and Nasa needs to stay in Russia's good books.

Of course, for $20 million a person, you could launch 7 people - the compliment of a shuttle - for $140m. The average shuttle flight costs $500m.

Re:In other news..

[Mondoz]

Las Vegas odds makers are giving 2-to-1 that NASA will find a way to much it up...

It's not in NASA's charter to make money on something like this. Congress won't let them...

Re:In other news..

[Christopher Thomas]

Of course, for $20 million a person, you could launch 7 people - the compliment of a shuttle - for $140m. The average shuttle flight costs $500m.

That's the complement when they're hauling cargo too. Keep the cargo, and the fare for the cargo covers most of the launch cost. Lose the cargo, and you can put a passenger/life support module into the cargo bay and carry more passengers.

The grand assumption is that you can find enough people willing to pay $20M for a week in space to make this profitable on the long term, however. I think you'd run out of $100M-ares pretty quickly.

Disclaimer

[firehzd1]

I would like to see a copy of the disclaimer on that trip ... we will not be held liable for your luggage melting on re-entry... nor yourself.....

Life insurance?

[Niche Slasher]

This is certainly a lot more dangerous than going by airlines. I hope they give a good life insurance bonus plus full refund of your ticket money if you happen to be on the wrong shuttle and get blown up into smitherbits.

-N

Re:Life insurance?

[YOU LIKEWISE FAIL IT]

This is certainly a lot more dangerous than going by airlines.

Sure... if you can find an airline that has direct flights to the ISS...

In a similar vein to your analogy, I present the following... "This tomahawk missile sure is a lot more dangerous than this orange!"

Yours,
YLFI.

I want a window seat!

[www.sorehands.com]

How much luggage do I get as a carry-on?

It would be a great trip.

The ph34rb33r webcomic is lame and must be trolled

[Anonymous Coward]

oOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoO TROLLS UNITE oOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoO

We must rape the forums on the ph34rb33r website, in order to deride them, and insult their lame excuse for a 'webcomic'. There are minimal forum rules in place to stop trolls over there, such as a 20 second delay until another post can be done. Obviously, this allows you to refresh the page once the 20 seconds is up, and then resend the data, so that it will be reposted. The forum in question also has image posting capabilities, allowing you to use the explicit material contained upon rotten.com and goatse.cx. In addition to all this lack of troll-protection, the forum actually allows anonymous postings! Members of TrollKore have already trolled their forums multiple times, with crapfloods and the posting of sexual imagery. The posts were deleted after around an hour, but I believe that we have put a small dint in their weak ego. Ah, did I say 'their'? I meant 'his', since he is the only one that runs the webcomic, and has no friends.

A sample of the offending content is here. Please note how the webcomic is fucking lame and unfunny, and its very existence needing to be eradicated from the Internet. Also note how the comic looks as if it was drawn by a small child (and probably was). THE INTERNET IS NO PLACE FOR A SMALL CHILD, LET ME TELL YOU, GOOD SIR! At present, this is more important than meer Slashdot, fellow trolls. You now troll for FREEDOM, FREEDOM FROM AN INTERNET WITHOUT LAMENESS FROM SUCH TWATS.

I ask you this... if the forum could be down by tomorrow, isn't that worth trolling for? ISN'T THAT WORTH CRAPFLOODING FOR?!?

I plead to you, fellow troll, this fucking LOSER has to be revealed for the motherfucker he really is.

Thank you.
TrollKore out.

oOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoO TROLLS UNITE oOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoO

-PENIS--PENIS--PENIS--PENIS-
P________________8',-',";,.P
E_______________#'',-',";,.E
N______________8(',-',";,..N
I_____________#(',-',";,.,.I
S__________#8#8_',-',";,.,.S
-_________#',-.8',-',";,.,.-
P________8~',-..#',-',";,..P
E_______#'',-',";8_',-',";.E
N_____8=',-',";.+#+',-',";.N
I____#=',-',";,._8',-',";,.I
S___#=',-',";,..(#',-',";.8S
-__8(',-',YOUR,.(8',-',";s#-
P_8(',-',MOTHER";#',-',-s8_P
E_#z',-',LOVES,";8',-..s#__E
N_8_.,#',"YOU',";~#,..88___N
I_#.##',-DEARLY,";~8,8#____I
S_8##',-+~'',-',-~#'8______S
-_#.,..-',-',";.'=8#_______-
P_.8+_',-',";,.'88_________P
E___888',-',";~8___________E
N______8#888#88____________N
I__________________________I
S____.oO TrollKore Oo._____S
-_At the head of the game._-
P__________________________P
E___irc.freedomirc.net_____E
N_______#trollkore_________N
I__________________________I
S__________________________S
-PENIS--PENIS--PENIS--PENIS-

USA's approval!

[axxackall]

As for today all international decisions must be approved by one or another US goverment organization. Otherwise US Goverment reserves the right to fix the problem by all means.

Re:USA's approval!

[Anonymous Coward]

what the heck is your problem you fag? NASA is the leader in space exploration these days and owns most of that space station they will be docking on. I don't know about you, but i don't let anyone use my car unless i approve that the person will be safe with it and/or pay me if they screw something up.

Penis Bird???!? Disgusting!

[Anonymous Coward]

Dear rotten.com,

I am unsure if you are aware of the problems that your "Incident with the bird" picture has caused on the popular technology website slashdot (http://slashdot.org).
Many users of this site's messageboards are posting links to http://smoke.rotten.com/bird/ and making text based representations of a bird on a man's penis. Frankly, while I am pro-freedom, this type of photo sickens me. Could you please move the location of the bird page on your site to keep slashdot readers from seeing things that are completeley unrelated to computers and technology? I'm not asking you to remove the content, just to relocate it.
FYI the text representation of the bird is:
*p_e_n_i_s_b_i_r_d_p_e_n_i_s_b_i_r_d_*
p______...___________________________p
e____(_..__`'-.,--,__________________e
n_____'-._'-.__`\a\\_________________n
i_________'.___.'_(|_________________i
s____________7____||_________________s
b___________/___.'_|_________________b
i__________/_.-'__,J_________________i
r_________/_________\________________r
d________||___/______;_______________d
*________||__|_______|_______________*
p________`\__\_______|__/__''\_______p
e__________'._\______/.-`____{}|_____e
n___________/\_`;_.-'_________/______n
i___________\_;(((____.--'\_/________i
s_________.(((_____.-;\______________s
b____.--'`_____,;`'.'-;\_____________b
i_taco's____.'____'._.'\\____________i
r_dick_--'_________|__\_|____________r
d__________________\_\,_/____________d
*p_e_n_i_s_b_i_r_d_p_e_n_i_s_b_i_r_d_*

with a link to the offensive site (http://smoke.rotten.com/bird/) underneath, these "Penis Birds" are posted by Penis Bird Guy, Penis Bird MAN and several other users.
Regards, Andrew J. Tosh

Note to self:

[(TK)Dessimat0r]

Do not use /. for sexual advice. That was very painful.

My take on this

[MisterFancypants]

I haven't really had time to read the article or the writeup above, but I'm against the whole idea of this.

Space travel needs this

[xtal]

This will do a lot more good than harm. Space travel suffers from some extreme eliteism, justified or not - and if the average joe doesn't see people who don't have 50 initials after their name going up, they are and will lose interest in space exploration. One thing that gives hope is that maybe someday you'll have enough money to do that - because in the great USA, the almighty dollar speaks both last and loudest.

Anything that drums up public support for space exploration gets a thumbs up from me. Honestly, I don't see how much this can jepordize anyone's life. Many/most of the systems onboard these craft are fully automated, and if shit hits the fan, there's pretty much zilcho anyone can do.

So no, I don't find this disgusting at all.

Re:Space travel needs this

[alakon]

Many/most of the systems onboard these craft are fully automated, and if shit hits the fan, there's pretty much zilcho anyone can do.

Wait-- then what do the astronauts do? Serve as experiments of human life in space? A waste of funds to try and encourage increased funding of space? I would not like to think so. There must be some purpose... but then again I watched C-SPAN last night. Live. It was not pretty.

So no, I don't find this disgusting at all.
Agree.

Re:Space travel needs this

[Moofie]

The astronauts on the space station are a PR stunt.

I am the world's biggest proponent of space exploration. I wish NASA would actually start to do it again.

Re:Space travel needs this

[Mondoz]

Many/most of the systems onboard these craft are fully automated, and if shit hits the fan, there's pretty much zilcho anyone can do.

That's not true at all. A very large percentage of the crew's time is spent on IFM tasks. (In Flight Maint.)

Getting any other types of tasks on the timeline is very difficult, especially now that there's only two crewmembers up there.

Re:Space travel needs this

[Dylan Zimmerman]

You really need to read a copy of the space shuttle operator's manual. The astronauts have to do EVERYTHING, including program the computers while they're in space because they don't have enough storage to hold all of the software to operate the instruments. Now, perhaps the Russians have automated their spacecraft, but ours haven't changed at all since the space shuttles were first built.

Really, the space shuttle isn't much more advanced than the Apollo capsule. Surely you don't think that the men on Apollo 13 and the ground crew that got them home did "pretty much zilcho".

Re:Space travel needs this

[Mondoz]

The astronauts on the space station are a PR stunt. I am the world's biggest proponent of space exploration. I wish NASA would actually start to do it again.

How would you propose we study the effects of long-term zero/micro gravity on humans?
Where would you suggest we explore? Other planets? Like Mars? I think we should. We should be on the Moon, we should be on Mars, and beyond... (And before we do that, we have to know how to combat the effects of the trip... Thus the station...)
But Congress holds the purse strings... NASA can't print money... They can't make profits to pay for their resources... They can only do so much...
You want them to do more, write to your congressman in support of NASA...

Re:Space travel needs this

[m00nun1t]

Maybe "in the great USA, the almighty dollar speaks both last and loudest" but remember what the I in ISS stands for? USA is just one player.

Re:Space travel needs this

[Moofie]

Study's been done. We know what we need to know.

I don't want to support NASA. I want to support space exploration, and right now NASA's only objective is to make certain that the only way to space is through them. They have a monopoly on space travel in the US, and they are destroying any competitor that looks like they could seriously threaten their manned and heavy-launch capabilities.

NASA has plenty of money. If the Shuttle and Space Station were mothballed, we could have a Mars mission in 10 years for 1/10 the budget.

Of course, the political realities are such that NASA would never survive a serious budget cut.

I have no interest in NASA as an organization. They haven't done anything useful or visionary since they decided to stop exploring space in the late 70's.

No. Shuttle /does not/ count.

Re:Space travel needs this

[Mondoz]

Study's been done. We know what we need to know.

Someone should tell them that, then. They're still learning more about these effects right now with the crews on the ISS.
Did you know that kidney stones form faster up there than on the ground? Know why? Neither do the people currently running the Renal Stone experiments up there right now. I'll have to tell them that you already know all the answers, and they're wasting their time.

I want to support space exploration, and right now NASA's only objective is to make certain that the only way to space is through them.

NASA has no control over who goes into space. Their charter dictates who NASA is allowed to send up on their vehicles.

The FAA dictates who is to go into space, not NASA. NASA gets their permission before launches.

If you wanted to go build your own rocket right now, you'd need the FAA's permission, not NASA's.

NASA has plenty of money. If the Shuttle and Space Station were mothballed, we could have a Mars mission in 10 years for 1/10 the budget.

Too bad NASA doesn't make that kind of decision. Go read NASA's charter. Congress dictates what types of missions they do.

they are destroying any competitor that looks like they could seriously threaten their manned and heavy-launch capabilities.

What kind of fantasy land are you living in?

Re:Space travel needs this

[Moofie]

My point re: the studies about long-duration space travel is this. We know enough to send explorers to other planets. This is one of the fake dragons that short-sighted people use to justify a far-too-conservative approach to space operation.

Do we know everything? Of course not. Columbus didn't know about Cuba either. Let's quit putzing around in low earth orbit and GO SOMEWHERE.

You might need to get FAA's permission, but just try to launch a spacecraft without jumping through NASA's hoops too. You won't be allowed to.

As far as destruction of competitors, look no further than Beale Aerospace. They had a superb rocket engine design with a lot of successful development behind it. NASA wrote a couple briefs alleging that the motor wouldn't work (although it did), and eventually the company went bankrupt.

Same thing has happened with several other non-establishment space businesses.

Look, this is my /livelihood/. I know what NASA is doing, and the environment they're operating in. Yes, Congress has them totally hamstrung as far as what missions they can do. However, that doesn't excuse their failure to nurture and develop new technologies, which is in the final analysis what NASA has done best.

They've lost focus, they've lost drive, they've lost direction. Now they're just a misguided bureaucracy, which exists only to propagate itself.

It needs to either be reformed, or destroyed. Don't much care which.

Re:Space travel needs this

[spike hay]

How would you propose we study the effects of long-term zero/micro gravity on humans?
Where would you suggest we explore? Other planets? Like Mars? I think we should. We should be on the Moon, we should be on Mars, and beyond... (And before we do that, we have to know how to combat the effects of the trip... Thus the station...)

Already been done. Astronauts have already spent periods greater than a year in space aboard the Mir. We know how space effects the human body. Already been studied. For the amount of money we have spent on the shuttle flights (500 million bucks a flight) and the ISS in the past 10 years, we could have had a mission to Mars or sent numerous probes to the outer solar system and Kuiper belt.

For years, we have been sending people up to a weightless vacuum a scant 200 miles off of the surface. It's just a vacuum, nothing more interesting. We need to explore further out than 200 miles.

Re:Space travel needs this

[ndinsil]

??

They have to "program" the Shuttle's computer by selecting between stored programs for different modes of operation. I have a copy of that book; it's cool but out of date. The shuttle has changed since it was first built, have you heard of the glass cockpit?

I agree the idea of astronauts floating around, letting the computers run everything, is totally off base. But give the Shuttle some credit.

Re:Space travel needs this

[ramk13]

How is this insightful??

Astronauts perform *many* tasks on the station. It didn't exactly put itself together like a transformer. Computers are great and all, but they aren't 'smart.' Like humans are. They don't solve problems, they don't fix things. And if you actually want to send people to Mars, then you better know whether they'll survive the trip. Nothing like radiation fried, microgravity weakened astronauts collapsing on their first TV appearance from Mars. To say that astronauts on the station are a PR stunt, is extremely stupid, not insightful.

As for NASA 'actually' exploring space again, maybe they would if they weren't absolutely neglected by the public. Not enough people care about space exploration, that's the problem. They've been operating on a shoestring budget since the beginning of the 90s. I know it isn't the most efficient organization out there, but it's not any worse than any other government organization of similar size.

Re:Space travel needs this

[Moofie]

If you're seriously interested about Mars and the fake reasons we don't go there, check out marssociety.org and/or Dr. Robert Zubrin's book "The Case for Mars". It lays out, in detail, how to go to Mars for a small fraction of NASA's current budget, how to create a sustainable presence on Mars, and debunks all of the "dragons" of long-term space travel you reference.

A space exploration program absolutely does require the public's support. However, that public support comes from a plan with vision, not from messing around doing the same ol' science in low earth orbit.

I don't care if it's not any worse than any other government organization. That's hardly a good barometer! I don't think the government should be involved at all, except as a research and development technology incubator.

NASA used to be an organization with a vision and a mission. Now, they run ferries to a can floating in space. I think it's a poor testament to the people who risked, and lost, their lives to explore space.

Re:Space travel needs this

[sql*kitten]

This will do a lot more good than harm. Space travel suffers from some extreme eliteism, justified or not - and if the average joe doesn't see people who don't have 50 initials after their name going up, they are and will lose interest in space exploration.

You are exactly right. Imagine if a government banned private citizens from owning or operating cars, yet used their taxes to build roads and buy cars for the exclusive use of unelected government officials. That is exactly what NASA are their supporters want to do with space - make it their exclusive preserve, with unlimited funding from the taxpayer and zero accountability.

Did you know there were originally 3 separate plans for the space station? Plans A and B called for expensive, difficult, in-orbit assembly of small parts. Plan C called for building the whole thing on the ground, strapping it to the back of a shuttle booster assembly in place of the shuttle, then sending it up in one piece to orbit where it would unfold/inflate/etc. The three plans were put before an independant panel at MIT to choose the best. The MIT brainiacs chose C: it was cheaper, easier, bigger, better equipped and it would have set a precendent for using the shuttle boosters as a heavy-lift platform.

But the government, in the shape of Al Gore and his minions, shot that plan right down, and told NASA to adopt plan A. Plan C was too cheap and involved too little pork for the home states - and would force the government to justify why the expensive shuttle programme was continuing at the expense of real science and exploration.

Space exploration won't happen for real until there is real accountability - and that means organizations that can justify their spending in terms of real results, like He3 mining on the moon or prospecting for minerals on Mars. The ISS is useless - its crew will spend most of their time just maintaining it, there's something like 1/2 person-day/day available for actual work! The sooner NASA is disbanded, the better!

Re:Space travel needs this

[Anonymous Coward]

there's something like 1/2 person-day/day available for actual work

You know you can solve this for 1/2 person by cancelling the day/day portion =)

Re:Space travel needs this

[jjhlk]

Would you mind giving some links to information on the technologies required to send people to Mars and back. I'm interested in this, because it isn't trivial to travel that far with fuel/life-support requirements... Thanks.

Re:Space travel needs this

[jjhlk]

Hmm: matthew (-%$# a.t 4as5df) island.net

Re:Space travel needs this

[Moofie]

Delighted you asked.

The key cost-saving feature is called "in-situ propellant production" by one of its big cheerleaders, Dr. Robert Zubrin. Dr. Zubrin has written a book called "The Case for Mars", which I advocate all the time as a great primer on how to get started with manned interplanetary exploration.

marssociety.org also has many whitepapers, including the core of Dr. Zubrin's work, available on their web site.

In broad strokes, the idea is this: Rather than take enough fuel for the round trip along with you, use two spacecraft. The return vehicle is sent to Mars, designed basically to land on the surface with dry tanks. The return vehicle carries hydrogen, which is combined by a simple chemical reaction with CO2 from the Martian atmosphere to create methane for fuel (and, of course, 02 for oxidizer). When the return vehicle has fueled itself (of course, this process will be automated and monitored from Earth) you shoot the astronauts to Mars.

The idea is that, once the return vehicle has landed on Mars and created enough fuel for the return trip (and, incidentally, plenty of extra oxygen and water for the crew to consume, and fuel for the land vehicles they will presumably want to use to explore), it is the second-safest place in the Solar System after their own cozy bedrooms here on Earth. Rather than building in return-to-Earth failsafes at every point (which are terrfically expensive in terms of energy cost and, therefore, dollars) the default failure mode is to abort to the Martian surface, and wait there until a rescue can be effected.

The plan also calls for another return vehicle to follow the crew during the same launch window, so that the crew, when it lands, has one fully-fueled return vehicle, one empty return vehicle (with, of course, lots of food on board) which will fuel itself with about six months of surface time, and their Mars lander stocked with enough food and water for the planned duration of their surface stay (which in this plan is on the order of six months).

This would not be a "flags and footprints" mission. It is an inexpensive, sustainable way to build an infrastructure for the exploration and exploitation of the Martian surface.

Suffice it to say, I think it's a pretty freakin' good idea. : )

(Note: I drop Dr. Zubrin's name a lot. I've met the guy and read his books: I think he's just the kind of half-crazy scientist type we need more of. /LOTS/ of people are involved in this and other plans...go read about 'em!)

In flight entertainment.

[Hogwash McFly]

Man: Excuse me stewardess, what is the in flight movie?

Stewardess: Apollo 13, sir.

Re:In flight entertainment.

[silne]

Flying High 2 would be more fun.

*William Shatner looks through periscope, looks at camera with odd look, and looks through periscope again.

*Shot of USS-Enterprise flying towards camera.

Re:In flight entertainment.

[isorox]

Thats airplane 2 you dope, and dont call me Shirley!

Re:In flight entertainment.

[Ignorant Aardvark]

It could be a lot worse. It could be Apollo 1. Or Challenger. Or Columbia ...

Re:In flight entertainment.

[jaraxle]

Or it could be Mission To Mars, which no doubt would make you and the rest of the crew want to run screaming out the air lock into the vacuum of space just to free yourself from that horrible movie.

Re:In flight entertainment.

[Rxke]

Actually, Crew nr. 1, the guys who had the tough task to get ISS up and running for permanent occupation, had this movie onboard. They enjoyed it a lot, though Bill Shepard had to explain-translate a lot of the movie to his Russian crewmates, they thought it was an excellent movie.

Wow

[mao che minh]

You have to take a step back and realize just how far we have come in the past hundred and some odd years: steam powered engines to the integrated circuit to the internet to space tourism.

Holy shit.

Re:Wow

[silne]

Next thing you know, astronauts are going to be thinking they can create wormholes by skating the atmosphere of the planet. :-) Not to forget Australia's inclusion in the space program *snigger* OK yes I'm talking about a fantasy TV show here ;-) There's no way we can afford to do anything other than watch as our communications companies launch satellites into space on another continent.

Re:Wow

[spike hay]

You have to take a step back and realize just how far we have come in the past hundred and some odd years: steam powered engines to the integrated circuit to the internet to space tourism.

What I'm just as amazed at is how little we've come in the last 40 years.

Early 1800's - Widspread use of steam powered locomotives.
Early 1900's - First airplanes and widespread use of the automobile.
1930's - Widespread air travel. Extremely advanced, maneuverable propellor driven fighters and bombers.
1940's - Jet aircraft introduced. The V2, first ballistic missile, is created.
1950's - Commercial jet travel introduced. Supersonic fighters introduced. ICBMs are introduced and the Sputnik is launched. The X-15 is first used.
1960's - First manned spaceflight. Manned flight to the moon. Interplanetary probes are first launched. The SR-71, which still holds the speed record for an airbreathing craft, is developed.

1970's-1990's - Here is where transportation advancement largely drops off. We've gotten more efficient jets. Rocket technology hasn't gotten any better. Cars have gotten more efficient. Other than some efficiency tweaks, we haven't advanced much at all in transportation since the exceedingly rapid advancements of the mid 20th century.

Re:Wow

[Cochonou]

What about the advances in rail transportation ? Namely, conventionnal bullet trains (TGV, ICE, Shinkansen) and above all magnetic levitation trains (MagLev, Transrapid).
So far, the TGV has reached 515 km/h and has a commercial speed of 320 km/h, while the Maglev reached 550 km/h.

I can only agree with you when you say such things are not breaktroughs, but fast transportation for anyone, either by trains or planes is indeed a significant fact of the late 20th century.

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

What about the advances in rail transportation ?

Um ..... the Tories sold them off, and Labour didn't renationalise them. Now the privatised rail companies are having to drop journeys from the timetable simply because, if they have fewer trains in the first place then there will be fewer late trains -- and if a train is late, the company gets fined. Paying these fines means they have less money to spend on improvements.

To cap it all, the Royal Mail is going to stop using the railways for transporting mail. That's got to mean more traffic on the roads and more night flights over residential areas ..... and 2p on a first class stamp if I'm not mistaken.

Re:Wow

[Christopher Thomas]

1970's-1990's - Here is where transportation advancement largely drops off. We've gotten more efficient jets. Rocket technology hasn't gotten any better. Cars have gotten more efficient. Other than some efficiency tweaks, we haven't advanced much at all in transportation since the exceedingly rapid advancements of the mid 20th century.

We've actually gotten off our tails and put ion drives and other electric thrusters into production and (semi-) widespread use. Any time you see "Hall effect thruster" in a satellite's description, that's an example of relatively recent space engineering doing its job.

Groundside, we've had steady improvement of fuel cell technology over the past several decades, which has reached the point where fuel cell powered electric devices from cell phones to cars are becoming practical (several prototypes to date). Unlike battery power, the energy storage density of fuel cell systems is comparable to that of gasoline, so we might actually see zero-emission vehicles in the near future. (Yes, emissions happen if you use fossil fuel plants to generate hydrogen or methanol, but you can put _scrubbers_ on a power plant, and change energy production methods in the power grid more easily than change all of the cars on the road.)

Lastly, bear in mind that all technologies peak after a while. The reason cars today look a lot like cars 50 years ago is that the fundamental design is pretty _good_. Many details change, and many incremental improvements are made, but the lack of a radically different design suggests that, over the time in question, a radically better option didn't exist.

FYI

[parkanoid]

It's "Rosaviakosmos", not "Rosoviakosmos".

Space is great, but there's something cooler...

[Anonymous Coward]

I am all for space adventure vacations. But I think most of the folks on Slashdot might be more interested in some discovery of the deep. I see their site offers Titanic examinations... that's all well and good, but... I really, really think most of us are interested in an adventure deep in the cavernous bowels of the goatse man.

Talk about a REAL adventure!

Not at all

[achurch]

It's not as though the tourists would have anywhere else to go--where are you going to send them, the moon? And as others have pointed out, the more money rich folks pour into space programs, the less of your tax dollars are taken out for them.

As far as "possibly jeopardizing the lives of astronauts", RTFA: This "extra mission" would fly two paying passengers that will have undergone months of training for the trip to the orbiting outpost. (emphasis added) Even Russia isn't stupid enough to send people into space without adequate training.

Does anyone else

[MisterFancypants]

think the parent poster is bitter because he can't afford a space trip? I do.

I have some shiny tinfoil I will trade for...

[coupland]

First it was a billionaire, then it was a pop star, now it's any tourist with money. Well hell I've got some shiny tin foil I will trade for a ride on the Soyuz.

You want that boy? Sure ya do! Good boy! You want the shiny tin foil? It's worth more than your GDP! Good boy, fetch!

Re:I have some shiny tinfoil I will trade for...

[dr_dank]

Well hell I've got some shiny tin foil I will trade for a ride on the Soyuz.

"He that would trade Government mind ray protection for a temporary space ride deserves neither"

- Benjamin Franklin

Re:I have some shiny tinfoil I will trade for...

[Anonymous Coward]

Bu you're not richer than Mikhail Khodorkosvky, are you? He's got 8 billion dollars. No, it's 8.25 billion now. Sorry, took too long to type that, it's 8.5 billion...

Fsck NASA's approval

[SunPin]

It's like living with roommates... if everybody is paying rent then notice is only a courtesy. No need to mark this as flamebait. NASA is such a horrible agency that disgraces the men and women that live and die for a future human presence in space. It takes money to do that. Nobody gives NASA money because NASA doesn't know how to properly manage it. Or make more of it. Consider that one of the experiments on Columbia was to see if popcorn pops differently in space. That's clue #1 that NASA is out of gas. NASA needs to be reduced to an interstellar department of transportation and just manage the traffic. They really need to get the hell out of the way.

Re:Fsck NASA's approval

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh I know you are just a troll but I have to correct your analogy. This is more like one of your roommates deciding he is going to sublet his room to somebody else for a month. I would think that in that situation you would agree that all roommates should have to approve it.

The rest of your post is just absolute childish ignorance and doesn't even deserver this much of a response.

Re:Fsck NASA's approval

[Mondoz]

Or make more of it. Consider that one of the experiments on Columbia was to see if popcorn pops differently in space.

Learn about what you're talking about before you speak.

Congress determines what NASA will do. NASA has a charter created by the government that dictates what NASA can and can't do.

Profiting falls neatly into the can't column.

In fact, NASA is obligated by its charter to give away all the technology it develops. UV sunglasses, pacemakers, velcro, and hundreds of other major scientific breaktrhoughs are a result of NASA research. But NASA is prohibited from making money off of them. If Congress would let them, NASA would take over the world.

Re:Fsck NASA's approval

[SunPin]

Anonymous Coward is being an ignorant troll.

The sublet analogy is bad. If you didn't live in your mom's basement, you'd know my analogy was right the first time.

This is everybody paying rent and everyone having an equal right to invite people over. Of course, they can't eat your food or go into parts of the apartment that you don't specifically allow but they are certainly allowed to exist as guests.

Re:Fsck NASA's approval

[Jardine]

UV sunglasses, pacemakers, velcro , and hundreds of other major scientific breaktrhoughs

Dammit, we all know that the Vulcans introduced velcro to earth. Enterprise taught me that. Anything else is revisionist propaganda.

Re:Fsck NASA's approval

[SunPin]

T'pol's grandmother was hot...

Re:Fsck NASA's approval

[Mac Degger]

The reason for that though is that NASA is funded by public money; you own all those patents anyway (if you're american, that is). But to avoid a hell of a lot of hassle, NASA just plonks it into the public domain.

Anyway, that's beside the point here; it's a fact that NASA is top-heavy, inefficient and basically just a money sink which doesn't do what it's supposed to do: open up space for the masses.

Personally I think it's a big shame on them that a private individual like Burt Rutan will (very likely) have a (commercial) re-usable shuttle service up in the air, sooner and for less cost than anything NASA has ever dreamed up. The NASA bigwigs should be begging to be bitchslapped for failure to do something similar.

Re:Fsck NASA's approval

[Mondoz]

Anyway, that's beside the point here; it's a fact that NASA is top-heavy, inefficient and basically just a money sink which doesn't do what it's supposed to do: open up space for the masses.

That's not NASA's mission. They are a research organization.

Anyone who thinks they are a just a money sink is either uninformed or blind. The number of world-changing technologies developed by NASA is staggering. Do a search sometime on 'NASA Spinoff' technologies. You'll be amazed at how many common everyday technologies were developed by NASA.

Personally I think it's a big shame on them that a private individual like Burt Rutan will (very likely) have a (commercial) re-usable shuttle service up in the air, sooner and for less cost than anything NASA has ever dreamed up. The NASA bigwigs should be begging to be bitchslapped for failure to do something similar.

Do you know anything of the multiple prototypes developed as a replacement for the Shuttle? Do you know anything of their history, or the fact that Congress terminated their funding?

Mr. Rutan will very likely be using a number of technologies developed by NASA to build his system, and put it towards a use that NASA is not allowed to do. The NASA bigwigs should be commended for doing as well as they are with the limited resources Congress gives them.

Re:Fsck NASA's approval

[Tekdemon]

UV sunglasses, pacemakers, velcro, and hundreds of other major scientific breaktrhoughs are a result of NASA research. Umm...I know Americans are supposed to hate the French and all, but just because the Swiss invented Vel(our)Cro(chet) has a French name is no reason to use revisionist tactics on it =P (btw a French textile plant guy helped the Swiss inventer get Velcro to market when nobody believed him and thought he was nuts)

Re:Fsck NASA's approval

[Mac Degger]

I know that NASA has developed a lot of new technologies. I also know where to find them (no, not nasa.gov :) ).

Thing is, NASA is a space agency, not a pure research agency. They do the research because they have (had) to, to get satelites into space. I think you mistake 'non-profit' for 'pure research organisation'.

Anyway, I know quite a bit about NASA's multiple idea's for shuttle folow ups. The fact that they have multiple should tell you something about the lack of efficiency there. The fact that they spent millions without actual prototypess should say more. The fact that an aussie built a scramjet for 10.000 dollars and actually flew it, whereas NASA, which had many more people and much more money on their scramjet, couldn't get theirs to fly is an even greater indication.
Face it; congress was absolutely right to cut funding for an effort which ran hugely over budget and didn't produce tangible goods, or even cost-savings.

But most telling of all is that many NASA people say the same thing; NASA is a beurocracy which is in the business of perpetuating itself more than doing actual science or innovating in their field. You should go read some scientific journals, and you'd know that.

Sure, they have done and still do amazing things...but how could you not with some amazing people and an amazing budget. But look at China, look at Japan, look at Russia even; all are doing much more to push the boundaries of human experience than NASA is now.

Re:Fsck NASA's approval

[Chris Y Taylor]

"Anyone who thinks they are a just a money sink is either uninformed or blind. "

Or is familiar with some of the crap that really goes on at some of the NASA centers.

Yes, NASA has plenty of spinoff technologies. Imagine what those engineers and technicians would have invented if they were working in the private sector trying to make a profitable product rather than using blind luck or a gov't administrator's guess at what would be a good invention.

Re:Fsck NASA's approval

[Anonymous Coward]

Consider that one of the experiments on Columbia was to see if popcorn pops differently in space.

Actually, I believe this is part of a greater experiment in time-travel.

Re:Fsck NASA's approval

[jjhlk]

"...look at China, look at Japan, look at Russia even; all are doing much more to push the boundaries of human experience than NASA is now."

While you may be correct on all your points, it kinda says something for NASA when you compare them to a country. Or maybe it says even more for the USA when they're not on top.

Re:Fsck NASA's approval

[Mac Degger]

WTF? Are you really that out of touch of reality?

OK, I'll try to spell it out in nice, simple words. With my comparison between NASA and other countries, I obviously mean NASA's counterparts in thosee countries. NASA is the US' national space agency (doesn't the acronym kinda give it away?)...as far as space research and development goes, NASA /is/ the US, in the same way that the national space agencies of those other countries represent their respective countries.

At most I would have to agree that it says something /against/ NASA when you have to compare them to a country.

Re:Fsck NASA's approval

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah. I wish I hadn't missed your reply. I was merely trying to adapt your idiotic analogy. Sending people to stay on a billion dollar space station is not exactly inviting people over for dinner. They are not going to go for a day and then come right back.

Either way, this is not about NASA. All of the agencies involved were asked.

By the way, I own a house and live with my girlfriend of 5 years. I know very well about having company over.

But what does it all mean?

[Mr. Balsakon Yurchen]

00001011 00111100 01000110 00100111 01000000 10110000 11101110 00001110 00101110 01010110 10110010 10000000 01111010 11101111 01001100 10010011 01101100 11100111 10001111 00111110 10000000 11100111 10010000 10101011 10100100 00101010 10111010 01110111 10111110 01001000 10110110 00010101 00000111 01111100 01101111 10110110 10111111 11001101 11101011 10011001 10110010 01101011 11000000 10001001 01000101 11000110 00011011 00100000 10000100 01101111 10110111 00101100 01111010 11101010 00011001 10011100 00011110 01011101 01111000 01001101 11010111 10101101 01001001 11110011 10010101 00010101 10111011 01000110 10011001 01100011 11101110 10100001 10010110 00010101 01111110 00101011 00110110 10110100 11101101 11001110 00111101 01001100 11101110 10111011 10101001 10110001 10111100 01011001 00100110 11010001 11000011 11000011 11000111 10010010 01011000 00011000 10101101 11111100 11110010 01001101 01110010 01111111 00111000 00000001 10111010 10100011 00001101 11101000 10100111 11010101 10011110 01100101 00011001 11101100 00000000 01101111 10001010 10011001 01000101 11001010 10010101 11001101 01011110 00100001 11110100 11101101 01011110 11011111 11000110 01011111 01011001 10000010 01101000 10111100 10011011 11111010 00010111 10000111 11100110 01001011 11000111 11110100 11011100 11100101 01010011 11110111 11100010 01000100 01100100 00011000 00111000 11000100 01000010 10011111 00001100 11011111 00110101 00011000 01100100 10000011 10110101 10011110 00111101 00000011 11011010 11100111 01011000 01110011 01101101 01010011 11000110 01111111 00011100 11011010 10111110 01011011 01111011 10011110 01101110 11100101 11001011 01111011 01001110 11101001 11100111 00110111 00000111 01001110 01010100 11110111 00110110 10110011 11101011 10110011 00000110 11011101 01011111 11101101 11001111 11001111 00100010 11010111 00111100 00111010 10100010 11110101 11110011 10001010 10101001 01000000 01001110 00001100 10110110 10001111 11010011 00111110 00011010 00001110 10001100 10001111 10010101 11110011 01111111 11110011 10101101 01010110 10101111 00011101 10001001 11010110 01001011 10111011 00100100 11011111 00011000 01101100 10010111 10101011 10010111 01010010 00111111 10110010 10110100 10001010 00111000 10000011 01101011 11111010 11011100 01111000 10011011 00010111 01010110 11110000 01101110 11101000

hotels.com

[retto]

I'll wait for the ISS to appear on hotels.com before signing up. I have to find someway to save a buck...

Re:hotels.com

[stefanlasiewski]

You don't want hotels.com .

You want hotels.ru

Sheesh, amateurs....

Re:hotels.com

[chef_raekwon]

thanks.

now all i have to do is book the flight, explain to my boss why this trip is business related...and expense it.

cya on the ISS,

Oh boy ...

[DaemonGem]

... here come all the non-paying rock bands.

-Dae

Re:But what does it all mean in ones and zeros?

[Mr. Balsakon Yurchen]

00000010 10111110 11011100 01001000 00000100 10010111 10100010 00000010 11110001 10101010 11001110 00100011 00101001 10001000 00101111 00011111 10000100 11110110 11001111 01011011 10100101 10010011 11011001 01100001 01101011 11101100 01010001 00011000 01100001 10100111 11110010 00001111 10100011 00111010 10110100 00100100 11001000 00000000 11101101 01011110 01010000 10010000 11110111 00000010 01100000 11100111 10100101 01101101 01001011 10101001 01000110 11010100 00101010 10001111 01010111 00101001 00011001 11100010 00001101 01100011 00100000 11100101 00001100 10100100 00011000 01000110 00001111 10011001 00100110 10101101 10001011 01001110 11000000 01001101 00000100 11101100 10001011 10011111 00011000 11101010 10110010 01000101 11010110 10110000 10101110 01101011 01010010 10001001 10011101 10010100 00101000 10111000 00001110 00100001 01001011 11111000 11101100 01111000 00011010 10011101 10010000 00011001 11011111 11000001 00100110 00001110 11111001 11111011 10101000 11101100 10111011 00010101 00111101 01010010 00111110 11101000 01000001 00110111 10101110 10001011 01111101 01000110 00000010 10110011 00010001 10111010 01011010 11000110 00111010 10000001 10011010 10100010 01101110 00001000 01111110 10101000 11101110 10001000 11110110 00100101 00001101 01110001 10110110 00000111 11101011 10101001 11110110 11001001 00101100 00011101 01000001 01110010 01100000 00001011 00111000 10110101 00000011 00000001 00010110 01000010 11000110 11011111 01001101 01010100 10111110 01011000 00100110 00101010 01101011 00000010 00011101 10101110 11110100 11110110 11001101 00110000 00101111 01111010 00011000 01010001 11110110 10001110 00010011 01011010 10101011 00000011 01111011 10110011 11001001 10011101 11111100 10000111 11001100 00111011 01011011 01101110 10100000 00010000 11100010 00101010 01000011 10001111 10110100 11011010 01110010 11111111 11111100 01111011 01110000 11001101 00101110 11111111 10011110 01011001 11011111 01100110 11100000 01010010 10110100 01000011 01001011 10011110 11010101 11010111 10100011 11111001 01100101 01110111 01110011 10001101 10011010 00110110 10111111 10010011 01111011 10100101 01101100 10000000 10100100 10000110 10000111 10111001 11100000 10110110 00101011 10001101 00011011 00100101 11011101 01001011 10000100 11100000 10110010 10101011 11110110 11101011 10101101 11001000 01000111 11010010 01110001 00110010 10001010 00010110 00100011 10100100 10111100 01011111 01111011 10011110 10000011 01000011 00001111 11110001 11011000 10101000 01010110 01010011 01101111 00001111 10001000 11110000 01000111 10100011 00000100 11111011 01001110 10001011 10011010 00010101 01010110 01100110 00010000 11000110 00111010 00110100 00010011 00011011 00001100 10011110 11100100 11000010 01100111 10001101 10001110 01000101 01011101 11100100 10110100 11000111 11010001 11011011 00111010 01011101 01010011 00101001 11011101 10101011 01111010 00000110 11101101 00101110 10011110 11011100 01100011 10011110 01111011 11000101 10100101 10001000 11110110 01111111 00011111 01001101 01101011 01000101 10100011 10110001 01100111 00101011 10001011 10111001 10010100 11011100 01111000 01001111 11101010 10101101 11111100 00101000 01010011 00101101 00100111 10001101 00011011 00010101 01010010 00101000 11000100 10010100 01011011 11101000 11110100 00101101 11110110 00100001 10100110 10010001 00100110 01110111 10110101 00011000 10100100 01111010 01000101 10100001 01011011 00101001 00001001 01110110 00100100 11100011 11111101 01011111 01101111 11011110 01110100 00011110 00100100 01101011 00110111 11010110 01111000 00111100 11010001 11100101 11110100 01000101 11111011 00010001 01001000 11111101 00000101 00010111 01110000 01110001 00010011 00010001 10101011 11110010 10000100 00110000 01010001 01011100 11100110 11011001 01111011 10110100 11100110 11100001 00011111 01010101 01101001 00101001 00010100 10101111 11001110 10111101 01001011 10001100 10001001 10001111 01010100 10100010 11111111 01111001 01110110 00000001 11111011 01110110 11010110 00100000 01100111 11100101 11110101 00010001 11011000 01101000 00110100 00001111 11000101 10110010 10000110 01000010 01000101 1

Tito got a grudging approval...

[PortWineBoy]

and a frosty reception.

NASA knows that the Russians need money for their space program and will probably tolerate this guy as well.

Re:Tito got a grudging approval...

[Mondoz]

NASA knows that the Russians need money for their space program and will probably tolerate this guy as well.

NASA also knows they need the Russian launch vehicles to take up the slack of the grounded Shuttles...
And Russia is milking that for all it's worth...

Re: If NASA says no...

[Glasswire]

...He can always sit in the Soyuz (not set foot on/in/onto(?)) the Station until it's time to go home. Oh, wait, THAT Soyuz will stay docked to the Station for six months...

He/She will be the first orbital hermit.

Okay, so...

[psyconaut]

1. Invesnt product
2. Sell product
3. Repeat (2)
4. Profit
5. Hitch a ride on Soyuz?

If I had that sort of money, I'd be there in a heartbeat. I'm one of those people who doesn't believe it unless he's seen it, so to speak.

As for NASA...meeehhhhhh! Is NASA's "approval" really relavent these days? I don't just mean the Space Shuttle disasters, but their slow-moving government oriented ways, way of accountability, etc.

Seriously, I think the Russians and Chinese are far more commited to serious space programs than us North Americans. And you know what? Good for them.

-psy

Re:Okay, so...

[Anonymous Coward]

Infinite loop detected.

Re:Okay, so...

[jafuser]

Aaargh! I got stuck reading this post! Fortunately, a co-worker created an interrupt...

And FAA

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn no-fly list

If you could put a notch in your belt while in...

[Anonymous Coward]

space. You'd get even more tourists, safe from the laws against prostiution.

The mile high club would be a hell of a lot higher.

Also included

[d3faultus3r]

Plus if you sign up now you get a 10% discount on Russian nukes!

Orbital Brothel

[Migraineman]

Mile high club? That is soooo 20th century. I suggest that the next module to be attached to the ISS should be the Space Erogenous eXperiment module. For the very reasonable price of USD 50M, you and your partner get a round trip ticket and a week's stay in the luxurious and private S.E.X. module on the ISS. (Meals and port fees are included.)

This is the kind of development that makes the budget woes of the ISS go away. If it costs <pinky> one Billlllion dollars </pinky> to put the thing up there, you've roughly broken even after 20 bookings. So be pessimistic and say that it takes 40 bookings. If they fly passengers 6 times a year, the module is "in the black" inside of 7 years. After that, it's generating revenue for the program and funding the science operations. How many other ISS modules could lay claim to that? I know I'd certainly welcome any structure that reduces the amount of money that the ISS sucks out of my wallet.

Re:Orbital Brothel

[geekoid]

The real money would be leasing it to porn studios.

Talk live with our girls! watch them float by while sticking what ever you like into them!

BOOBS IN SPAAAAACE!!!!!!!!!!!

I could go on, but it only gets worse, or more 'in your face' as it were.

Re:Orbital Brothel

[MousePotato]

BOOBS IN SPAAAAACE!!!!!!!!!!!

please tell me you were thinking history of the world part II

Re:Orbital Brothel

[Anonymous Coward]

or more 'in your face' as it were.

"Sticking" with the mood, shouldn't that be 'on your face'?

Re:Orbital Brothel

[nacturation]

First it was video tapes, now the internet. Count on the porn industry to make anything profitable.

Re:Orbital Brothel

[Anonymous Coward]

Like controlling jizz isn't hard enough with gravity.

Re:Orbital Brothel

[deblau]

The Russians have done a lot of thought about this subject, and the general conclusion is that it's not practical or ethical. Besides which, it'd be damn hard to do. It takes about 30 minutes just to use the toilet up there, because of the lack of gravity-induced friction (traction) forces. Sex is all about friction. You'd need to strap one party down, and the other one would need hand- and foot-holds just to maintain contact. It would take 10 minutes just to get into position, not to mention the fact that if I were another crew member and I saw ejaculate floating around or stuck in the air filters (or heaven forbid, any of the flight controls) I'd probably kick your ass... it just doesn't seem worth it.

Re:Orbital Brothel

[Papatoast]

Think of the porno movie spin offs and proffits to be had by licensing streaming video!! Think of the angles that are possible in a zero-G environment...the Russians in the background maoning "Dah...dah..dah..." Its LUST in Space!

Re:Orbital Brothel

[ajs318]

It would float around forever in tiny droplets in zero-G. You'd have to be verycareful if you were a woman wearing a skirt with no underwear .....

Re:Orbital Brothel

[bravehamster]

It takes about 30 minutes just to use the toilet up there, because of the lack of gravity-induced friction (traction) forces. Sex is all about friction. You'd need to strap one party down, and the other one would need hand- and foot-holds just to maintain contact.

Ahh, but the difference is that the toilet is not grabbing you back (at least I hope it doesn't). You don't really need gravity induced friction if you're grabbing onto each other, legs and arms wrapped around each other, etc. The real answer is that we won't know what's practical until someone goes up there and really tries it. And I completely fail to see how ethics comes into it.

Re:Orbital Brothel

[Anonymous Coward]

It would die very, very quickly.

actually...

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a write-up of some financial feasability studies over at tubgirl tech

Aloha Soyuz, welcome to Nethack!

[Voltara]

So who else saw Tourist-class and right away assumed it was an article about nethack?

Slashdot ID #75865 (It took that long?)

[Tackhead]

> lol... i didn't notice that. and no, I know BillGates is not a /.er

Whoever registered Slashdot #75865 http://slashdot.org/~BillGates might beg to differ with you. :)

why should nasa have a say? russians don't blow up

[Anonymous Coward]

nasa has lost more people in space than the russians. so i don't know why nasa should have any veto power over the russian space program and how it is funded.

pretty simple actually:

[geekoid]

Disclaimer:
You may die. poihnt in fact if anything goes wrong, you will die. If you cause something to go wrong, and though some miracle people don't die, you will be ejected nto space, and you will die.
If you do not want to die, put the pen down and leave.

Do you accept that you will probably die and agree you or you estate will not hold anybody who own or come in contact with anything that is in anyway connected to space travel?

If you do die(and probably will) taco bell promises to name a taco after you, if your body hits a target they specify.

Good luck, spave traveller.
Please kiss you loved good by.... forever.

Re:pretty simple actually:

[FroMan]

Usually when I read your posts I don't think much of your signature.

This time however, the system is full of glitches.

Capitalism

[compjma]

What I want to know is why the heck are we letting the Russians do this before us? This is just the kind of capitalism that will encourage the commercialization of space. Can you imagine a shuttle flight that actually showed a profit?

Expensive

[Zarxos]

Tickets are available for $20 million per seat aboard the Space Adventures-1 (SA-1) mission.

Well, doesn't look like I'll be going into space any time soon!

No. Not *THAT* road map

[Kaz Riprock]

"road map"? I hate buzz words/phrases.

The other one that really irritates me (especially as a researcher who goes to many seminars): the take-home message.

First off, I hope I came to a talk that was sophisticated enough that you actually can't sum it up into a take-home message.

Secondly, if I were dumb enough to need you to tell me you're summing your entire topic up into a 10 word phrase, then I'd need you to read directly from your Powerpoint slides...oh, I see you're doing that, too.

[sniff, sniff]Ahhhh, karma well burnt.

Frequent flyer miles?

[ChilyWily]

How many miles would that be for a single trip? Will it allow me to get one more free?

Picking nits

[achurch]

Space tourist tickets have recently been selling for $2e+7. ISS cost ~= $1e+11. At those prices, you'd have to send up 50,000 tourists just to pay for the amusement park, ignoring the cost of gas and a ride.

Putting aside that the ISS isn't just an amusement park, you're off by an order of magnitude:
1e+11 / 2e+7 = 10000e+7/2e+7 = 10000/2 = 5000

Lottery Instead

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think the rich should be rewarded for being rich. Instead, I think a lottery would be more appropriate, with tickets in the range of $100 and made available to anyone in the world. I would certainly buy one. And why shouldn't I be on a space flight instead of Lance Bass or whatever the hell his name is? This would generate a much larger revenue than any single ticket.

And as for the overhead of actually conducting the lottery, we could just use the existing infrastructure in most countries that already exist for the purpose of monetary lotteries. Then, a winner from each country could be chosen, and from those, a final winner would be picked. It really wouldn't be that difficult.

Re:Lottery Instead

[BarryHaworth]

I don't think the rich should be rewarded for being rich. Instead, I think a lottery would be more appropriate, with tickets in the range of $100 and made available to anyone in the world.

A lottery is a good idea, and has been mooted before - though it has yet to get off the ground. Feel free to organise one - I'm sure Space Adventures would be just as happy to sell the tickets(s) to the organiser of a lottery as to any one else who has the money.

In the mean time, let the rich fly. They can afford it, and by paying to fly in space they show that there is a market for space flight. This will encourage private firms to start offering trips into space, and eventually make it cheap enough for the rest of us.

Re:Lottery Instead

[The_dev0]

Yeah, maybe they should hide 5 golden tickets inside those awesome chocolate space food sticks!

Re: If NASA says no...

[BarryHaworth]

This is almost what Denis Tito did. On his flight (the first Space Tourist flight) NASA dragged their feet on granting permission, and it was planned that he remain in the Russian parts of the station for his stay at ISS. In the event NASA relented and he was allowed in the American section as well.

Re:Disgusting?

[Pejorian]

Aw, c'mon, you're just saying that. If you're a true slashdotter, you'd be up there in a minute if someone else offered to pay for your seat. I know I would! Man, for a chance to get into orbit, to be weightless, to be outside of the atmosphere... Probably the farthest anyone's going to get this side of 2050, if ever...

You know you want it. C'mon. You KNOW you do.

Soooo....

[starseeker]

Does this mean we get another shot at punting Lance Bass into orbit? ;=)

Re: If NASA says no...

[rosbif73]

This is microgravity. You can go anywhere in the station without "setting foot" at all!

Business class

[hackerm]

Looks like they don't offer business class seats. No way I'm sitting behind the curtain!

Wonder if they have a loyalty program though. You could rack up some good miles quickly.

Woo Hoo!

[UrGeek]

Space for two! Now, you too (for a mere $40 million bucks) can join the 100 mile club!

Even better if the tourist can help out with the house cleaning! But there is a dark part of me that wish that anyone who can afford this would just burn up on reentry.

Cremations are a no charge freebee!

[Anonymous Coward]

Freebee!

Hrmmm...

[Dimentox]

I just wish it did not cost that much. One day.. one day maybe we can all do this. Most likely it will be way past our time. If I had the money I would do it. Dim

Send me to space

[SpinyNorman]

So my lifetime goal of visiting space got one step closer...

Now all I need is to register sendmetospace.com, and wait for 20 million $1 donations to my PalPal account.

Better tell my fiancee to buy those bungee cords for the zero-G "research".

Sex in Space?

[Metroid72]

Gee... I wonder how long until we get the first Space's Mile High Club members...

What's the point of sending probes?

[maddogsparky]

What is the point of sending probes all over the solar system? I, for one, would like to entertain the notion of actually going there and seeing it with my own eyes. I logically know that it is likely that this will not happen to me for a long time, if ever, but I can still _hope_ to go some day.

What was the effect of all those accounts sent back by Lewis and Clark and other early European-decent explorers in North America? The more people found out, the more they wanted to go there. Lots of people died trying to get there and trying to make a living, but they kept coming and built a society like none before it.

Re:What's the point of sending probes?

[Waffle Iron]

I'm all for sending a manned mission to Mars. If that's what we want to do, let's do it. Sitting in a tin can orbiting the earth with no explicit mandate to prepare for a Mars mission is not accomplishing anything, however.

The current situation is as if Lewis and Clark set out from Philadelphia to explore the West, but then stopped on the Ohio border and sat on their butts doing nothing but spending government money for 10 years.

Re:What's the point of sending probes?

[sketerpot]

They would be accomplishing something (albeit small) if they had a decent crew on the thing. After all, you never know what experiments may come in handy. Most of the experiments probably won't be useful at all (and frankly I don't want to have spiders in a space station with me, even if I'm going to do some weird experiment with them), but NASA and friends would be building up a body of knowledge if they weren't such cowards.

Personally, I've given up hope that NASA will do anything big or dramatic again, and I'm hoping that somebody manages to get in space seperately. I don't care who. Rutan, Armadillo, whoever; I WANT TO SEE PEOPLE IN SPACE! If it becomes cheaper, then we can get some real stuff done in space.

As for going to mars, having nuclear propelled spacecraft would be, IMHO, the only hope of sending actual people to mars. I'm also a bit bitter that people recoil whenever "nuclear" is mentioned.

But let's do something! Not just sit on our butts!

Again. Axxackall proves to be neutered dork.

[Anonymous Coward]

Whoa! What incredible insight on US international relations. Are you some disgruntled Iragi, Palestinian, or Taliban? Too bad. I'm taking a liking to looking for idiotic comments from you. Makes my day. Thanks!

Speaking of melting on re-entry

[nortcele]

... we will not be held liable for your luggage melting on re-entry...

Did they find any of the Timex watches from the last shuttle ride to be "still ticking". Just curious. Might make a good ad for Timex.

"Takes Mach 12 and a 20,000 foot drop. Yup, still ticking"

Russia *DOES NOT NEED* NASA's approval...

[jbottero]

However, NASA has yet to be officially notified or to give formal approval, so there are still some speed bumps in the road map Didn't get it last two times, don't need it this time. The USA likes to think they own the planet, but it ain so.

What? No Flood of "In Soviet Russia" Jokes?

[Enkerli]

Maybe it's lurking beneath my threshold. There must be an explanation.

Re:What? No Flood of "In Soviet Russia" Jokes?

[Anonymous Coward]

Aw, I feel sorry for you.

In Soviet Russia, bad joke misses YOU!

Re:If you could put a notch in your belt while in.

[Anonymous Coward]

Imagine if Richard Branson got in on the act? "Virgin" atlantic is indeed a misnomer for an airline offering horizontal beds .....

Perhaps he's been working on a secret project to build a rocket to travel to the Red Planet {matches the corporate colours, after all.....} Actually, in space there probably is no law against, erm, powdering one's nose *sniff* *wink* ..... He's certainly mad enough to try.

On the other hand, we have to remember this is the person who can't even get a hot air balloon to stay up. What chance has he got with a spacecraft?