Slashdot Mirror


Japanese Mars Probe Failing

Anonymous Coward writes "After months of silence and a week of hopeful half-truths, Japanese space officials have finally confirmed that their Mars-bound Nozomi probe is teetering on the brink of failure in its five-year quest to explore the Red Planet. The Nozomi orbiter is one of four spacecraft that are due to converge on Mars in the next two months. The other three probes -- the European Space Agency's Mars Express and NASA's two Mars Exploration Rovers -- are still on track and in good working order, according to the latest status reports. Mars Express is due to enter Martian orbit on Christmas Day and send a British-built Beagle 2 lander to the surface, while the NASA rovers should arrive on Jan. 3 and Jan. 24."

242 comments

  1. the question is... by zr-rifle · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...will it commit harakiri?

    --
    Hack your mind out of its sandbox.
    1. Re:the question is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The japaneses hide the auto-destruction's button.

      They prefer the option of to orbit or to crash.

      They don't prefer the option of to go out of the orbit's way nand to auto-destruct.

      Why the half-truths?

      open4free

    2. Re:the question is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, sounds like a plan.

    3. Re:the question is... by macdaddy357 · · Score: 1

      Jokes about a probe to uranus in 5... 4... 3...

      --
      How ya like dat?
    4. Re:the question is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OMG, its a first! The first time a goatse link is relative to the conversation! And actually funny!

    5. Re:the question is... by mod_parent_down · · Score: 1

      I know Steve Stone must've felt like doing just that about a million times... but you can't send him to a mental hospital -- who'll sing "Take Me Out to the Ball Game?"

    6. Re:the question is... by G-Man · · Score: 4, Funny
      Perish the thought! This is an interplanetary probe, carrying the honor and dignity of the Japanese nation. It will commit seppuku , as befitting a spacecraft of its' station. It would never commit hari kiri like some common communications satellite.

      Of course, I'm not sure who will be the "second". Perhaps one of the other satellites or the Martians can finish the thing off...

    7. Re:the question is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not Japaneses. It's Japanese.

    8. Re:the question is... by BJH · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not to ruin the joke, but harakiri and seppuku are exactly the same thing, just different terms for it - one colloquial and one formal.

      Not to mention that page you linked to gets it entirely wrong calling the blade used a kozuka - that's a small knife a few inches long. Good luck cutting yourself open with something like that. The blade actually used is a wakizashi.

    9. Re:the question is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      will it commit harakiri?

      Yes - definitely.

    10. Re:the question is... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      It gets more complicated than that.

      Seppuku is honorable suicide. The rituals are different for men and women. Men commit seppuku by hara-kiri ("belly cutting") with a wakizashi. Women commit seppuku by cutting their throats with a kozuka. (I don't know if there's a separate term for this act.) Hara-kiri is a fairly crude term, kind of like "kicking the bucket" in English, so if you want to be respectful to a man who's killing himself, you talk about him committing seppuku rather than hara-kiri.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    11. Re:the question is... by ShadowRage · · Score: 1

      nah, only seppuku

    12. Re:the question is... by BJH · · Score: 1

      Take a look at the characters for 'seppuku'. Yes, that's right - 'cutting the stomach'. So referring to cutting your throat as seppuku would be a little... um... strange.

  2. What's the point? by Typingsux · · Score: 4, Funny
    The Martians are now wise to us and will just shoot the rest down. That's what has happened to all the others.

    --
    The above post is an editorial, the poster cannot and will not be held responsible for all or in part for it's contents
    1. Re:What's the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The parent was modded insighful???!!!

      Jesus, the I knew some of you nuts were paranoid, but I think you've been watching too much of the all news channels if you're this sketchy.

    2. Re:What's the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HOW THE FUCK IS THAT INSIGHTFUL. way to go, mods. yes, there really are martians and pointing out that they have learned to shoot our probes down with "lay-zers" is a remarkable insight.

    3. Re:What's the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This comment is actually funnier with it moderated as insightful.

      I can just imagine some totally crazy person reading that comment in their bathtub filled with tinfoil and say to themself "This Typingsux person makes a very good point +Insightful to you wise man of men. Now, BACK to my ENEMIES LIST, looks you made it two years in a row Mr. Bugs Bunny, well done!"

    4. Re:What's the point? by RabidStoat · · Score: 1
      Of course their real secret weapon is to confuse our scientists into using different measuring systems to calculate orbital/entry type information. They don't even need to waste any energy shooting the probes down, we burn them up for them !

      You know they're reading this laughing at us don't you?!

    5. Re:What's the point? by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      Meh. When their cylinders start landing, then I'll start to worry.

    6. Re:What's the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, a +4 Troll. Now _that's_ funny :)

    7. Re:What's the point? by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      Why, we've got smallpox!!! :-)

  3. Real contamination risk would be small by RobertB-DC · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From the article:
    Friday's JAXA statement denied one Tokyo press report that probe was doomed to impact Mars and possibly contaminate the planet. Such a scenario would violate an international "space quarantine" treaty.

    I know we've had a lot of cool reports that microbes have survived exposure to hard vacuum for extended periods, but do we really have to worry about "contaminating" Mars? The craft was probably sterilized pretty well before being launched. Then, a year and a half ago, it got hit with a solar flare strong enough to make it miss Mars the first time... that should have baked any hitchiking bugs pretty well. And then, there's the latest round of Solar hiccups to take into account.

    Finally, if the craft does hit Mars, it's going to do it in a totally uncontrolled manner -- 'cause if they get any control, they'll steer it away. That implies a high velocity, which even in the thin Martian atmosphere should melt the craft into slag.

    Extremophile bacteria at molten sulfur vents is one thing, but hitchiking in a blob of ablating steel?

    And as far as that "space quarantine" treaty... what exactly is the punishment for sneezing in space?

    --
    Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
    1. Re:Real contamination risk would be small by kippy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, I raised my eyebrow when I read that too. What I thought was funny was how they mentioned Mars Express is due to enter Martian orbit on Christmas Day and send a British-built Beagle 2 lander to the surface, while the NASA rovers should arrive on Jan. 3 and Jan. 24

      So they are worried about a man made meteor seeding the planet but sending rovers to the surface is somehow alright???

      hey, if we do "contaminate" the surface, that will save genetic engineers a lot of trouble if we ever try to terraform. "space quarantine treaty", now there's a treaty we've got to get rid of.

    2. Re:Real contamination risk would be small by Verteiron · · Score: 1

      Extremophile bacteria at molten sulfur vents is one thing, but hitchiking in a blob of ablating steel?

      I don't know, these guys seemed to do okay... and they're probably a lot more delicate than some bacteria.

      --
      End of lesson. You may press the button.
    3. Re:Real contamination risk would be small by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      >>So they are worried about a man made meteor >>seeding the planet but sending rovers to the >>surface is somehow alright???

      By Jove i think you've got it! Not.

      The japanese probe was never intended to touch down so was never decontaminated.

      The laders were intended to reach the surface, and so were decontaminated appropriately.

    4. Re:Real contamination risk would be small by snake_dad · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Bacteria survived being on the moon for years. Parts from (IIRC) a Surveyor probe were brought back by an Apollo mission. Granted, these bacteria were found inside an instrument, but since the Japanese probe may shatter on impact there is a contamination risk, I think.

      About the reentry, I'm not sure it will burn up completely. Meteorites crashing on Earth are said to be warm, not scalding hot. Could some rocket scientist jump in and give his view on the reentry? Metal vs stone, Earth vs Mars atmosphere? (Hmm.. re-entry sounds wrong. It's going to enter the Mars atmosphere for the first time)

      --
      karma capped .sig seeking available Slashdot poster for long-term relationship.
    5. Re:Real contamination risk would be small by jdray · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I think the "contamination" they don't want is typically referred to (terrestrially) as "litter." I understand that (thanks quite a bit to the Russian program, but also to "just leave it here" Americans) the moon is quite littered with a bunch of junk that either didn't work or doesn't any more. Biocontaminant or not, trying to do geologic science and having to move aside slagged lander parts that drilled into Tharsis to do it would be a little annoying...

      --
      The Spoon
      Updated 6/28/2011
    6. Re:Real contamination risk would be small by kalidasa · · Score: 1

      The japanese probe was never intended to touch down so was never decontaminated. The landers were intended to reach the surface, and so were decontaminated appropriately.

      Folks, pile some mod points on the anonymous coward parent posting (quoted above). This is exactly the point.

    7. Re:Real contamination risk would be small by RobertB-DC · · Score: 1

      About the reentry, I'm not sure it will burn up completely. Meteorites crashing on Earth are said to be warm, not scalding hot.

      Hmmm... you actually triggered a memory that would have made me write a rather different posting. A quick Google found this page dealing with a meteorite that was seen over Jordan. What appeared to be an area where a meteor fell out of the sky and scorched the land turned out to be the remnants of an unrelated brushfire.

      And it's pointed out several times that the hot bits get peeled off by atmospheric friction so quickly that the rock itself is cold if it's big enough to impact.

      So I think you've helped me disprove my point. Oh, well, hopefully we were going to infest Mars with our microbes -- carried on human bodies -- anyway.

      --
      Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
    8. Re:Real contamination risk would be small by ch-chuck · · Score: 3, Interesting

      do we really have to worry about "contaminating" Mars?

      Nature sure doesn't worry, and man is definitely a product of nature. Life spreads by 'contamination', that's what makes it life! Heck, how do we know that all life on earth didn't start by a passing visitor from Alphi Centauri landing, taking a whizz on some rock, declare the place uninhabitable and take off? Those who would stop exploration by complaining about 'human contamination' should get off their high moral horse, put aside their cosmic guilt complex and allow the spread of life to go on, whether by building moon bases or stowaway mold spores. I'll bet that every successful interstellar alien race has a policy of 'conquor first, ask questions later', while the 'kind peace loving don't interfere' races end up as their raw protein and amino acid supply.

      --
      try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
    9. Re:Real contamination risk would be small by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Re: CNN's coverage. I noticed that too. Also, 110,000 people demonstrating in London, toppling a Bush statue in effigee somehow didn't merit mention...

    10. Re:Real contamination risk would be small by fbg111 · · Score: 1

      I think the reason is that we want to first be sure there is no indigenous life on Mars that we might harm by spreading our bacteria/DNA/whatever there. Prime Directive and all...

      --
      Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
    11. Re:Real contamination risk would be small by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BRAVO! BRAVO! AUTHOR! AUTHOR!

      Actually, the author is Frederick Forsyth, the British novelist. He wrote a letter to the Guardian, London's left wing newspaper. It was one of a series of open letters to President Bush. Here is what Forsyth wrote:

      You will find yourself assailed on every hand by some pretty pretentious characters collectively known as the British left. They traditionally believe they have a monopoly on morality and that your recent actions preclude you from the club. You opposed and destroyed the world's most blood-encrusted dictator. This is quite unforgivable.

      I beg you to take no notice. The British left intermittently erupts like a pustule upon the buttock of a rather good country. Seventy years ago it opposed mobilisation against Adolf Hitler and worshipped the other genocide, Josef Stalin.

      It has marched for Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Khrushchev, Brezhnev and Andropov. It has slobbered over Ceausescu and Mugabe. It has demonstrated against everything and everyone American for a century. Broadly speaking, it hates your country first, mine second.

      Eleven years ago something dreadful happened. Maggie was ousted, Ronald retired, the Berlin wall fell and Gorby abolished communism. All the left's idols fell and its demons retired. For a decade there was nothing really to hate. But thank the Lord for his limitless mercy. Now they can applaud Saddam, Bin Laden, Kim Jong-Il... and hate a God-fearing Texan. So hallelujah and have a good time.

    12. Re:Real contamination risk would be small by barakn · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Metallic meteorites have a much better chance of surviving a trip to the Earth's surface than stony meteorites, so increased density means increased survival. Also, small surface area to volume ratios help (a spherical object will survive better than a plate).

      At first glance, satellites, being somewhat rounded and made mostly of metal, seem to fit the bill. However, they have voids in them which lower their overall density. Furthermore, if the outer layer of the satellite is breached, then the interior surface becomes part of the exterior, and the surface area to volume ratio increases. Or to look at it a slightly different way, hot gases enter and start melting things (Columbia). So the satellite tends to come apart. But individual parts of the satellite do fit the bill as dense, low surface area survivors, so the end result is a rain of metallic debris.

      But that discussion is more relevant to Earth. Mars's atmosphere is extremely thin. A satellite crashing through that might survive relatively intact. However, that also means that the atmosphere would not be able to bleed off much of its kinetic energy, so it would hit at great speed. I would expect a big explosion and crater, though I still can't guarantee bacteria wouldn't survive in debris throw clear of the explosion.

      --
      "I'm so moist I'm sticking to the leather." -Kermit the Frog on The Late Late Show
    13. Re:Real contamination risk would be small by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ... what exactly is the punishment for sneezing in space?

      20 years in the electric chair.

    14. Re:Real contamination risk would be small by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn we finally found you, Captain. You've been lost in the early 21st Century, and our scans have somehow picked up your random postings on "Slashdot". Please come with us and return to the Enterprise. Your crew is waiting...

    15. Re:Real contamination risk would be small by whereiswaldo · · Score: 1

      hey, if we do "contaminate" the surface, that will save genetic engineers a lot of trouble if we ever try to terraform

      Right, why not get it over with? There's plenty of planets to try and discover life on (though most will take hundreds of years to get to). What's more important is we (humans) need another place to call home just in case we get nailed with some global catastrophy. But I suppose we'll have to battle with the dilemma of truth vs. survival for some time longer.

    16. Re:Real contamination risk would be small by barakn · · Score: 1

      I'm so full of shit. My remarks about surface area are ok. And it's true that metallic meteorites explode less often than stony meteorites, but not because of density. It may have more to do with the excellent heat conduction and the strength of metal, heat of vaporization, etc.. Here's an excellent page on meteor falls.

      --
      "I'm so moist I'm sticking to the leather." -Kermit the Frog on The Late Late Show
    17. Re:Real contamination risk would be small by Evil+Pete · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Don't forget in this case there is no real atmosphere to slow it down. The escape velocity for Mars is a bit over 5,000 metres per second. So it should impact at about that speed. I'm not saying bacteria wouldn't survive ... but the impact is bound to cause a lot of frictional heating of the debris, and bugs like radiodurans or even extremophiles may not be able to handle it. Anyway, there's not a lot that can be done from here anyway.

      --
      Bitter and proud of it.
    18. Re:Real contamination risk would be small by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
      Heck, how do we know that all life on earth didn't start by a passing visitor from Alphi Centauri landing, taking a whizz on some rock, declare the place uninhabitable and take off?

      Well, as urine is sterile (assuming similar Alph Cent physiology) life probably started from the half eaten "bif yi-ro" he tossed on the ground.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    19. Re:Real contamination risk would be small by ultranova · · Score: 1

      One would imagine smearing oneself across the countryside in a blazing fireball would kill even the hardiest microbes...

      ...And even if it doesn't, the lack of water, food and warmth would keep them from replicating, thus dooming the population to a slow, icy death.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  4. Hard lines by Space+cowboy · · Score: 2, Funny

    The chances of anything getting to Mars,
    Are a million to one
    In this case, it spun.
    ... right out of control. Isn't this the one that came to close to a comet ? They thought it would be ok, but I guess not :-(

    Pity - the more craft we send there, the more we'll all learn.

    Simon.
    --
    Physicists get Hadrons!
    1. Re:Hard lines by Space+cowboy · · Score: 1

      Aah. I see from the poster above that it was a solar flare. Far more likely than a comet :-)

      Simon

      --
      Physicists get Hadrons!
    2. Re:Hard lines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For a second there I thought I was reading haiku.

    3. Re:Hard lines by VanillaCoke420 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the Giotto spacecraft?

  5. You may be right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They may have Weapons of Mass Destruction. Maybe they've got oil, too.

    I think we should launch a full scale nuclear assault on Mars as soon as possible.

    1. Re:You may be right by stripe · · Score: 1

      Nuke Mars? I think the best course of action is to steer as many comets as possible into collisions with Mars. We then destroy all Martians and increase the amount of water/ice to make it habitable for us at the same time. :)

    2. Re:You may be right by Uber+Banker · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      No no no! WMD is just another way of saying they have oil. No way we're going to radiate all that oil. Better we use conventional force (young redneck males enrolled in the army) to further our USA-corp greed and USA-leader's power trip.

    3. Re:You may be right by kippy · · Score: 1

      This is probably a crazy troll but the comet thing is still a while off technologically speaking. Flinging them into the atmosphere to burn up would probably be the way to go so it doesn't kick up a 200 year dust storm and cool the planet even more.

      As for nukes, I've read proposals that include nuking one or both poles for some quick, cheap heat and atmosphere. sounds pretty cool to me.

    4. Re:You may be right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      As for nukes, I've read proposals that include nuking one or both poles for some quick, cheap heat and atmosphere. sounds pretty cool to me.


      Yeah, because we really need more heat and atmosohere.. GJ.
  6. I see by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 4, Funny

    So hopefully the British rover will have tea ready for us when we get there. Jolly good.

    --
    "I only speak the truth"
    Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
    1. Re:I see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the American ones a couple of dripping Big Macs, god damn. See, that wasn't funny, was it? Idiot.

    2. Re:I see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Who drinks tea with their Big Mac? Supersize that sumbitch and get an 80-gallon Coke and a garbage bag fulla fries.

      Now that's a lunch.

    3. Re:I see by baileytal · · Score: 1
      A lunch for Jabba The Hutt, maybe! Who lived on Tattooine! A long time ago! Not Mars at Christmastime! Maybe...

      Get real!

      --
      Never at a loss for words... because of the voices.
    4. Re:I see by D-Cypell · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sure, laugh at us!

      Do you have any idea how much of the great british public's tax money went on the research required to get water boil correctly in those kind of inhospitable conditions...

      Not to mention the whole earl grey vs english breakfast fiasco!

    5. Re:I see by reality-bytes · · Score: 1

      Not to mention the reasearch into curing the Willow for our cricket bats to survive the martian atmosphere.

      These people have no idea.............

      --
      Ripping an new rectum in the fabric of spacetime.
    6. Re:I see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And after all that, the crustless slices of bread have dried out, and the slices of cucumber are completely limp - so at least the cucumber sandwiches are just the way they are back home.

  7. Maybe China should chip in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They spent the whole $2B Japan (mostly) subsidized them this year on a space program, while they're living on international handouts. Time to give back to the people who actually paid for it.

    1. Re:Maybe China should chip in by Uber+Banker · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I do not understand the term "$2B Japan" is not USD. Do you mean yen the equivalent of USD2bn or YEN2bn (and don't know what Japanese currency is)?

      Besides, you seem to be arguing economics and are also mentioning China.

      Firstly China != Japan

      Secondly, Chine has been buying US government debt at a large rate in the last year. This creates demand for USD which increases the price of USD. Yes, China has been subsidising the US economy (buying the US government's debt means providing financing the Bush budget deficit). US government expenditure is subsidised by China (and other Asian economies too). If these countries did not want to buy US government debt it means the demand for USD would fall, therefore the value of the USD (a function of demand and supply) would fall, i.e., the USD would cost less in overseas currencies, meaning anything bought from overseas would cost more. Increased import costs are not good for the US economy because the US (being a developed economy) benefits most from value-added (adding quality) to goods and services so it sells rather than consumer. If the currency falls that means it sells for less.

      Please feel free to reply to this to discuss economics, since the vast majority of 'economics' discussed on /. is not economics but flawed opinion.... I am happy to add something back from the economics geekdom to the tech geekdom as i truely don't like to see prejudice masked up as expert opinion (any economics discussion on /. seems to degenerate to prejudice opinion).

    2. Re:Maybe China should chip in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      China spent US$2B on their space program.

      Japan subsidized them around US$2B. There were some other countries who chipped in, but Japan paid the bulk of it.

      I think by referring to them differently, I demonstrated that I understand that China != Japan.

    3. Re:Maybe China should chip in by Uber+Banker · · Score: 1, Interesting

      They spent the whole $2B Japan (mostly) subsidized them this year on a space program, while they're living on international handouts. Time to give back to the people who actually paid for it.

      Let us deconstrust this:

      "They spent the whole $2B Japan (mostly) subsidized them this year on a space program," "they" and "them". This is your opening sentence but your "they" and "them" are undefined. Is China or Japan the subject and is China or Japan the object of your sentence, if so which way round?

      "while they're living on international handouts." Neither Japan (a prosperous nation albeit in some short term economic woes) nor China (which has bought much of recent US government debt, and is by far subsidising the US government and has a vast international monetary surplus) is being subsidised. The country being most subsidised in the world, at the moment, is the USA.

      "Time to give back to the people who actually paid for it." So who paid for it? The Japanese taking a commerical interest in a small minority of Chinese companies? The international investor [read Western European and North American] by pumping investment into Chinese companies and investment vechiles? The US and European governments selling their debt (this is the opposite of taking an interest, it is taking a liability)?

      No doubt you know China!=Japan (and my reply was deliberatly patronising, though it is a shame you are coward enough not to show a UID).

      But "Time to give back to the people who actually paid for it."???? If you mean give money to Japan then remember Japan have not volunteered this money, they have commercially invested and should take the hit if their investment does not pay off (and of course should be allowed to take the reward if it does). This has been a matter of few years in which time it is silly to expect repatriation of income. IMHO China is genuinely appreciative to accept international investment as it brings with it international expertise, something China needs.

      China has not defaulted on its debt (unlike most of S.America or Russia), is showing strong growth and is followwing fair international trade laws (more so than the US). Yes it needs to develop its internal competitiveness and raise more of its population from poverty and develop a more democratic government. Tis cannot be done overnight but steady steps are being taken.

      As far as repaying debt goes, China has a faultless record. Surely your post was a troll?

    4. Re:Maybe China should chip in by nyseal · · Score: 1

      I have an issue with the value-added = quality statement. Simply put, it's not true. Value added means the company is spending money to complete the function or process, hence increasing the cost of the product to it's end user. Any really good manufacturer tries to DECREASE the value added processes while increasing product/process quality. With today's economy the way it is and OEM's demanding price reductions from their supliers, the only real way to deal in the world economy is through process improvement. That is why there are Manufacturing Engineers, Industrial Engineers and yes, Software Engineers. Most of the time it's not fixing a defunct process rather than improving the efficiency of the one you have that makes a company that much more profitable.

      --
      [SIG] Remember Mattel handheld games?
    5. Re:Maybe China should chip in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, a cheaper USD would be good for America as a whole, though not so good for American consumers of foreign goods. If the value of the USD falls, American goods become cheaper, thus exports rise, thus demand for American goods goes up. (and so on down the chain of logic).

      This is precisely the reason the Chinese buy so much US Debt: to bolster the value of the USD, keeping the Yuan relatively cheap, and thus the cost of manufacturing goods in China cheaper than, say, manufacturing them in Mexico.

      I don't mean to imply causality, but you should also note that the current rebound in the US economy has come just as the dollar has fallen to its weakest level in years.

    6. Re:Maybe China should chip in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      You misinterpreted the guy's original post. Writing an essay about economics will not change this. It's over, you made a simple mistake, move on.

    7. Re:Maybe China should chip in by Uber+Banker · · Score: 0

      Hi. That is not what value added means, FYI. Value added means adding value in the end product which may mean crafting it delicately over a lathe or adding loads of gizmos... but value is determined by the consumer and drawn back to the input to decide if the input process was a value adding processes.

      You can add a lot of production costs without adding to the value of the end product. Adding quality that is paid for means adding value, cutting or adding costs does not mean adding or taking away from value... the value is simply what someone will pay.

    8. Re:Maybe China should chip in by Uber+Banker · · Score: 0

      Hi. The US economy as a whole is a consumer of foreign goods, in addition the goods it buys are usually low quality un- or semi- menufactured goods. A rise in the US dollar rate would mean these goods are cheaper to import in US dollar terms but exports are more expensive t the rest of the world, in rest of the world terms. Also, US exports tend not to be made anywhere else in the world (financial products through TV programs through micro chips) so demand on them is less 'elastic' on prices - i.e., if prices of these goods increase it wouldn't affect demand much.

      Yes, a high US dollar is bad for low quality exports such as steel, agricultural products or even generic cars, but a high dollar means high quality goods such as micro chips or software can be exported and more relative money gained than if the exchange rate were low (and more low quality goods imported).

      Because value of goods exported must equal value of money paid for them, if the US demands Chinese or Mexican goods (as they produce them cheaper) it will naturally mean those currencies rise in value (dollars are passed to them in payment).

      Economic statistics lag... a rise in US growth has been caused by postponed corporate investment building up and being released and stong consumer spending... the import/export component of recent growth figures was tiny in comparison. Also not the stock market is lagging projecting poor earnings of companies) and although some investment will pickup there will not be phenomenal economic grwoth in coming quarters due to the high debt burden consumers and the government ( increased government debt = increased taxes to service it) are under, constraining their spending.

      The dollar falling to its weakest levels is simply reflecting the poor fundamental factors (high debt, lower future spending) the US faces, compared to the rest of the world seeing a glimmer of light.

  8. if its by OwlofCreamCheese · · Score: 2, Funny

    if its martians shooting them down... martians suck! these things take 5 years to get there! the hit like one out of 10 things we send! who can't aim well enough to hit something when you have 5 years to try?

    --
    -You're wasting your time. Alfador only likes me.
    1. Re:if its by Sivaram_Velauthapill · · Score: 1

      Tactic #2321: Do not reveal your best weapons to the enemy until the time comes.

      Tactic #923874: Make the enemy think you suck.

      I'm sure the Martians are using some primitive weapon to shoot them down. This is done in order to confuse the humans and make them think the Martians suck... YOU, my dear human, have fallen for their tricks ;)

      Sivaram Velauthapillai

      --
      Sivaram Velauthapillai
      Seeking the meaning of life... @slashdot of all places ;)
  9. how much do they cost? by chevelleSS · · Score: 1

    How much does the average Mars space probe cost?

    1. Re:how much do they cost? by tarquin_fim_bim · · Score: 2, Informative

      The European 'Mars Express' probe has a budget of 150 000 000 euros.

    2. Re:how much do they cost? by Bendebecker · · Score: 1

      a lot

      --
      There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
      most of us won't be able to afford it.
      -- Lemmy
    3. Re:how much do they cost? by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/nozomi_fears_ 030703.html

      "With a price tag of $88 million, Nozomi, or "Hope", has been just that. Japanese scientists are hoping the craft can get to Mars and provide useful data."

      http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technolo gy /rover_update_021009.html
      "The MER program is an $800 million effort. It's what NASA calls the "soup to nuts" or beginning-to-end costs. This total life cycle expense includes launch and operating the rovers on Mars."

  10. Its all gone!!! by t0ny · · Score: 2, Funny

    Everything we send to Mars disappears. Im starting to get scared...

    --

    Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.

    1. Re:Its all gone!!! by AndroidCat · · Score: 1
      Sort of a green flare with a green mist trailing behind it. Mission Control, are you getting this? [beep] [beep]...

      OooooooLaaaaaaaah!

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    2. Re:Its all gone!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Sort of a green flare with a green mist trailing behind it."

      A farting martian?

    3. Re:Its all gone!!! by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      Jeff Wayne's musical version of The War of the Worlds. 1978, so it's probably older than you are.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    4. Re:Its all gone!!! by Bullet-Dodger · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and I though it was Europa we weren't supposed to land on. Lousy greedy monolith.

  11. Contamination? by Meat+Blaster · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I'm starting to wonder if we should be sending all these probes out without any chance of recovery or destruction. While it's probable there isn't any other sentient life out there, it's also probable that our efforts to explore our surroundings are affecting or destroying living and non-living celestial evidence.

    I keep thinking about those fish that live in caves that we believed were blind from birth, but were actually blinded by our observations, which required orders of magnitude of light more than they were ever accustomed to. Who knows how much Earth biology survives in these probes when they crash land?

    Maybe we should put a halt to sending out any more of these things for now and work more on passive observation techniques.

    1. Re:Contamination? by SharpFang · · Score: 1

      Some of first manned missions to Mars will pick them and put them in "Museum of Conquest of Mars".

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    2. Re:Contamination? by srobring · · Score: 1

      If we are ever going to explore space, we will eventually have to send out probes. It would be great if we could treat Mars as a crime scene, and take care not to upset anything we don't mean to, but a space probe isn't exactly a surgical instrument.

      The best we could do is be as careful as we can with Mars, perfect our skills now, and learn from our mistakes with the next planet.

      Most likely, we'll infect the entire Solar System, and chalk the space program up to biological warfare against all those pesky aliens. (serves them right)

    3. Re:Contamination? by TheLittleJetson · · Score: 1

      I'm starting to wonder if we should be sending all these probes out without any chance of recovery or destruction. While it's probable there isn't any other sentient life out there, it's also probable that our efforts to explore our surroundings are affecting or destroying living and non-living celestial evidence.

      Well, with the Japanese craft heading towards early demise, it'll be a few more years before we see the red planet contaminated with sanrio characters.

      -m

    4. Re:Contamination? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You've got to play big to win big.

      While it's probable there isn't any other sentient life out there, it's also probable that our efforts to explore our surroundings are affecting or destroying living and non-living celestial evidence.

      They can't BOTH be probable. I doubt that the places our probes crash/land are the only places where evidence of life exists. However that would be an amusing irony.

      It reminds me a bit of this Lunar Lander precursor.

      Also I think those fish are apocryphal.

    5. Re:Contamination? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe we should put a halt to sending out any more of these things for now and work more on passive observation techniques.

      No.

    6. Re:Contamination? by FIT_Entry1 · · Score: 0

      You were a hall monitor in elementary school right?

    7. Re:Contamination? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any probe in orbit around Mars will eventually impact the surface when its orbit decays- its just a law of gravity and such. These orbiting probes would never reach escape velocity.

      How many do we have in orbit right now? I know Global Surveyor is still snapping pix. I think there is also another.

    8. Re:Contamination? by DoorFrame · · Score: 1

      Is that fish story true? That sounds like a liberal college teacher's example of why exploration and advancement are inherantly negative. Do you have a link for the story?

    9. Re:Contamination? by BJH · · Score: 3, Funny

      Don't underestimate the power of Hello Kitty!

    10. Re:Contamination? by nyseal · · Score: 1

      blechhhh.....we can't even work on passive observation on our own planet.

      --
      [SIG] Remember Mattel handheld games?
    11. Re:Contamination? by s20451 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm starting to wonder if we should be sending all these probes out without any chance of recovery or destruction. While it's probable there isn't any other sentient life out there, it's also probable that our efforts to explore our surroundings are affecting or destroying living and non-living celestial evidence.

      Even if there is contamination from Earth, it should be easily identifiable, because it would consist of microbes that humans encounter on a daily basis. And it's highly likely that life from another world -- assuming it has the same characteristics of Earthly life -- would have very distinct DNA from evolving on an alien world for hundreds of millions of years.

      As for damaging the evidence, life usually evolves to survive in particular climates. Microbes from the surface of Earth might survive at Mars, but they would probably not thrive, due to the differences in temperature, pressure, atmospheric composition, available nutrients, and so on. They would not take over Mars. (By a similar argument, it's unlikely that a microbe from Mars could cause any damage on Earth.)

      And as for evidence of sentient life, if aliens are like humans in terms of cleaning up after themselves, the evidence should be absolutely everywhere. (This is also known as Fermi's objection, put crudely: if there is other intelligent life in the universe, and interstellar travel is possible, then where is everybody?)

      --
      Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
    12. Re:Contamination? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to the research I read, they're born blind. Not sure where that other story came from.

      http://www.exn.ca/Stories/2000/07/31/63.asp

  12. I'll bet $10 on the Beagle 2 by kclittle · · Score: 0
    "The other three probes -- the European Space Agency's Mars Express and NASA's two Mars Exploration Rovers -- are still on track and in good working order, according to the latest status reports. Mars Express is due to enter Martian orbit on Christmas Day and send a British-built Beagle 2 lander to the surface, while the NASA rovers should arrive on Jan. 3 and Jan. 24."

    oooo! BattleBots on Mars! Yea, baby!

    -k

    --
    Generally, bash is superior to python in those environments where python is not installed.
    1. Re:I'll bet $10 on the Beagle 2 by chester+simpson · · Score: 1

      all your probe are belong to us!

  13. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by grasshoppa · · Score: 1

    Or maybe it's a LONG FUCKING WAY to Mars?

    Possibly?

    Oh, and you DO listen to Art Bell too much, if this is the result of it.

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
  14. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by mikerich · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Maybe I listen to Art Bell too much, but it seems pretty strange that so many probes to Mars have failed in some fashion. Perhaps the Martians don't want us messing up their planet?

    Or maybe Mars is a long way away and it's really hard to build a machine that can be expected to work for months on end whilst being baked and simultaneously frozen after being placed in a vacuum and bombarded with radiation. Then to put this complicated device on top of hundreds of tonnes of high explosive so that you can get it moving fifteen times faster than a rifle bullet with the objective of placing it somewhere near a body only slightly larger than the Moon?

    Best wishes,
    Mike.

  15. Someone needs to tell there designers by Bendebecker · · Score: 0, Troll

    You fail it!

    --
    There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
    most of us won't be able to afford it.
    -- Lemmy
    1. Re:Someone needs to tell there designers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do there designers have to do with Mars?

  16. Probe Redundancy by MonkeyCookie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    At least there's quite a bit of redundancy with the martian probes. With four going there at once it's quite likely that at least one of them will get there.

    The martian probe success rate is so bad that maybe space agencies should launch multiple smaller ones with the expectancy that some will fail to reach their destination than put all their hopes on one larger probe.

    1. Re:Probe Redundancy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Somewhere on Mars, there is a Martian playing "Huuman Invaders". Each wave is bigger than the previous and moves faster.

    2. Re:Probe Redundancy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      maybe space agencies should launch multiple smaller ones

      Why do you think there are four in the first place? That's been NASA's Mars philosophy (heck, everywhere philosophy) for everything since Cassini.

    3. Re:Probe Redundancy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ya sort of like launching 2 at a time

  17. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by ultramk · · Score: 3, Funny

    Two points:

    1. If you even know who Art Bell is, then you listen too much.

    2. Mars is a very long way away. A Very, Very long way away. It's moving, too, at a good clip. This distance allows more to go wrong on the way than going somewhere closer, like the moon, by an exponential factor. ...and why, yes, this is rocket science.

    (One more reason why Mars is no place to raise a kid. Ooooo, I'm channeling Shatner!)

    m-

    --
    You catch enchiladas by picking them up behind the head and holding them underwater until they don't kick anymore -VeGas
  18. OT semantics by Scrameustache · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    WMD is just another way of saying they have oil.

    Ya know, technically, the sept11 attacks used plane fuel (a derivative of crude oil) as a weapon of mass destruction. With that insane logic, Iraq did have WMD and the facilities associated with it.

    Of course, Dubbya specifically mentioned nerve gas, bio and nuclear (well, nucular, actually), so that invalidates my semantics, but still...

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

    1. Re:OT semantics by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      Ya know, technically, the sept11 attacks used plane fuel (a derivative of crude oil) as a weapon of mass destruction.

      Well, while I'm not disputing the enormity of what took place, at the end of the day it was "only" two buildings that was destroyed; I'm not sure that qualifies as "mass destruction".

      By the same token, I'm not convinced that biological or chemical weapons count as being "destructive", as they (presumably) only kill animals. I personally don't like thinking of killing as "destruction"; it seems a little too dehumanising, as though you're trying to ignore the fact that it's people we're talking about, not buildings. (Not you personally, obviously)

    2. Re:OT semantics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Well, while I'm not disputing the enormity of what took place, at the end of the day it was "only" two buildings that was destroyed; I'm not sure that qualifies as "mass destruction".

      I applaud your critical thinking, but I would argue that 3000 dead (but for the grace of God 30,000) in one blow qualifies as mass destruction.

    3. Re:OT semantics by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      at the end of the day it was "only" two buildings that was destroyed

      I lost count at around 5 or 7 buildings myself...when something as big as the world trade towers goes down, they take down other stuff with 'em...
      And a couple thousand people.

      By the same token, I'm not convinced that biological or chemical weapons count as being "destructive", as they (presumably) only kill animals. I personally don't like thinking of killing as "destruction"; it seems a little too dehumanising, as though you're trying to ignore the fact that it's people we're talking about, not buildings.

      Er...they only kill animals, true, but that includes human animals.

      People ofthen forget that we are animals.

      I don't know what scale gets you in the WMD class...I think the Dubya administration made that thing up, so its a bit hard to tell, but I personally would say that anything above 3 digits in body counts would qualify. Normal weapons kill by the single to the hundreds, fancier weapons kill more...

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

  19. Contamination risk would be real by Spamalamadingdong · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I don't suppose you've heard of common earth organisms like Deinococcus Radiourans? This bug has such potent DNA-repair mechanisms that it survives very heavy irradiation (it apparently evolved them to recover from DNA damage during long periods of dryness, but they work for radiation-induced breakages too). And substantial parts of a spacecraft survive even an uncontrolled atmospheric entry; look at how much of Columbia came down, including large pieces of astronauts.

    If someone sterilized the bird with something like chlorine monoxide it's a different matter, but I've seen nothing about this and an orbiter wouldn't normally need to be sterilized like a lander. That's why Galileo met its fiery end.

    1. Re:Contamination risk would be real by Planesdragon · · Score: 2, Informative

      And substantial parts of a spacecraft survive even an uncontrolled atmospheric entry; look at how much of Columbia came down, including large pieces of astronauts.

      Columbia was a controlled reentry; it suffered a heat-shield failure, not a tradgectory failure.

    2. Re:Contamination risk would be real by Spamalamadingdong · · Score: 1
      Columbia's trajectory stopped being controlled at the moment the left wing failed. True, it had slowed down quite a bit before that, but there are two factors to consider:
      1. The escape velocity of Mars isn't all that high either, and
      2. Plenty of pieces of unprotected Earth satellites make it down to the surface intact despite fully uncontrolled re-entry without any heat shielding.
      If I recall correctly, the propellant tanks of the Iridium satellites were considered to be particular threats from that last should they have come down where people live.
  20. you no spell good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    learn to spell more right.

    you am not too good at it now. it made you to look foolish when you spell wrong words.

  21. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by mikeswi · · Score: 1

    Nah.... It's the Europans pissed that we didn't go there first. They'll shoot down one probe per year until we meet their demands (an off ramp to Europa on the interplanetary spaceway next to a MickeyD's).

  22. When? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    When will we stop sending probes and start sending missiles?!!

    1. Re:When? by ctrl-alt-elite · · Score: 2, Funny

      The probe was Japanese, not American. If it was American, you can bet that a War on Space Terrorism would be declared and missiles would soon follow...

    2. Re:When? by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 1

      We should give them a few weeks to prove they have no weapons of mass destruction. If they fail to give us the proof I say we let the missiles fly.

      --
      Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
    3. Re:When? by tomzyk · · Score: 1

      One planet at a time, sir. One planet at a time.

      --
      Karma: NaN
  23. Still fingers crossed for Mars Express by mikerich · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Mars Express has to perform one VERY important maneuvre. On December 19th it must eject the Beagle 2 lander whilst still travelling at interplanetary velocity.

    If Mars Express fails to shoot Beagle 2 into space, the retro-engine will not have enough thrust to brake Mars Express into Martian orbit. Both probes would then fly past the planet and into solar orbit.

    Beagle 2 then travels through space for six days before hitting the Martian atmosphere at interplanetary velocity. Beagle 2's onboard transmitter will not come to life until the probe impacts the surface, so you can imagine that those six days will be pretty tense for the ESA teams.

    All being well, Beagle 2 and Mars Express should arrive at their destinations safe and well in the small hours of Christmas morning. By the time we're opening our presents here in the UK, they should have received a signal from the Martian surface.

    So, here's hoping!

    Best wishes,
    Mike.

    1. Re:Still fingers crossed for Mars Express by SharpFang · · Score: 0, Troll

      Could someone explain that -1 troll moderation on this?

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  24. Offtopic, your sig by aliens · · Score: 0, Troll

    I thought the same exact thing. Then I remembered oh wait I live in the US, same place that now has the Terminator as a major political entity.

    It really is disturbing. "Huge Terrorist bombing in Turkey, BUT who cares! Jacko is wacking off lil boys again!"

    Made me really sick to my stomach. I guess if it's not 3000 people and happening in our country Bin Laden doesn't matter worth a shit. I'm sure some families in Turkey are glad their country is allied with the United States right now.

    --
    -- taking over the world, we are.
  25. No, it's "how much does a Martian earn?"... by ErnstKompressor · · Score: 1

    Answer: Nothing, cause they got no pockets...

    --
    We apologise for the fault in this post. Those responsible have been sacked. -- Signed RICHARD M. NIXON
  26. c'mon guys... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    it's not like this is brain surgery!
    [off to the brain surgery forum... "c'mon guys...it's not like this is rocket science!"]

    1. Re:c'mon guys... by Flozzin · · Score: 1

      The said truth is.
      With brain surgery you only kill one person.

      Rocket science. You calculate this correctly...Tens of millions of people will die. Ie nuclear weapon targeting system. And on the flip side, you calculate it wrong, and guess what...Tens of millions of people will die once again. I've taken multiple calc courses, and believe me, I'd rather be a brain surgeon

      --
      "Cowardice in a race, as in an individual, is the unpardonable sin." --Teddy Roosevelt
  27. Reliability by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
    Wow...and here I was thinking a Lexus or a Honda was a well put together reliable car. But NO, they can't even make a probe that lasts longer than several hundred lightyears. What kinda mileage is that?!

    --
    Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    1. Re:Reliability by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      HOnda's suck!

      Well at least they do when they hit over 130k miles. I know from experience.

    2. Re:Reliability by civilengineer · · Score: 1

      If there was a road to Mars, the Japs would have got there first.

      --

      New year Resolution: Don't change sig this year
    3. Re:Reliability by pinkboi · · Score: 2, Informative

      Do realize that this probe already went around Mars and back to Earth. It's pretty amazing that the thing has been functioning all this time.

      --
      "The absurd is clear reasoning recognizing its limits"
      -Albert Camus
    4. Re:Reliability by SharpFang · · Score: 2, Interesting

      probe that lasts longer than several hundred lightyears.

      I'm not sure if you're trolling here or you're just misguided...

      1) Light year is an unit of distance, not time, so no "last longer than" but "go further than".
      2) It's helluva much too - distance it takes one year for light to travel. There's 3 light seconds from Earth to Moon, 7 light minutes to the Sun, about one light hour to Neptune, four light years to Proxima Centauri, nearest star. Mars is at worst several light minutes away from Earth - when it's on the opposite side of the Sun. Building a probe that would stand several hundred lightyears, traveling at speed near to light, would be pretty hard... it would take several hundred years for it to get to its destination and it would probably be hit by numerous micrometeorites in the meantime. And E=(Mv^2)/2, in this case E=(Mc^2)/2 so energy of one micrometeorite hitting the probe would be half the energy of its nuclear annihilation. Enough to evaporate a serious starship.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    5. Re:Reliability by kaatochacha · · Score: 1

      So my 170,000 mile acura and my friend's 300,000 mile twin which both perform flawlessly are figments of the imagination?

    6. Re:Reliability by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1
      Lets just say I bought my 91 Honda Civic a year ago for 3.5k and I am close to paying for it again with the repair costs. ALways something is breaking on it.

      Yes it has a lot of miles and I should cut the car some slack but when a car costs more to maintain then its worth, its time to toss it. At 134k I assumed it had another 60k miles out of it.

      Of course I put a shitload of miles and abuse it on a daily basis.

      Well, got to go get my brakes checked. They are now leaking brake fluid, just 2 months after I had the pads replaced, raidator replaced, strusts replaced, and muffler replaced.

    7. Re:Reliability by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1
      ... and alternator, all 4 tires, 2 car batteries, and the rear axle. ... all in 1 year. Amazing.

    8. Re:Reliability by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      Just to be a pain... (sorry, my geek tendencies won't let it slide)

      The earth/moon are less than 2 light seconds apart (about a quarter million miles, light being 186,000 mi/sec)

      The sun is (on average) 9 minutes

      Jupiter is about an hour, neptune around 2 or 2.5 hours out

      Good point about the micrometeorites... man, that's gonna mess up the paint...

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    9. Re:Reliability by cr0sh · · Score: 1
      Sounds like you got screwed on a used car. Happens all the time. Most of today's vehicles are "throw-away" models anyhow. If you want something that is likely to last you for a while, it is best to get something pre-1980 or a large truck.

      I recently purchased a 1979 Bronco 4x4 - it needs quite a bit of work on it, but nothing really serious (mainly seals between engine/tranny/transfer case). The engine was rebuilt before I bought it, and the rest of it is damn sound (rides better than my 94 Ranger). I have no clue how many miles it truely has on it - either 190,000 or 290,000 (the odometer reads 90,000 - so I know it has to be one of the two, because my Ranger already has 140,000). Unfortunately for me, I have had to put a good grand of money in it just to get it to pass emissions (it had *no* emission controls on it). But it has been worth it - it is only for off-roading anyhow (my Ranger is my everyday vehicle).

      I knew its problems before I bought the truck, but when I went to the shop to get the first set of emission related stuff put on it (before I had a manual that showed everything - hard to find info on old stuff like this), they asked why I didn't bring it to them first (they do a check on everything for like $35.00 - keep that in mind cause most shops will do this checking for a fee, and can help you decide whether to buy the car). It really wouldn't have mattered to me - this Bronco was *exactly* what I wanted for a 4x4, so the money and time I have spent has been all worth it.

      Good luck on your car...

      --
      Reason is the Path to God - Anon
    10. Re:Reliability by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
      I'm not trolling, I was making a joke. Since I know absolutely nothing about light years or any of that stuff, I just made it up. I expected someone to correct me soon after posting.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    11. Re:Reliability by starsong · · Score: 1

      Not to be pedantic, but the classical formula E=(Mv^2)/2 doesn't work in the relativistic regime. Practically speaking, if you want energy values for an object moving at anything over 0.1c in your rest frame you need to use relativity. Also, the kinetic energy of an object goes to infinity as its speed approaches c; that's why interstellar travel is so hard. Depending on the exact speed (0.9c vs. 0.999999999c), your probe might have enough energy to evaporate a starship or the entire solar system.

    12. Re:Reliability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is your mechanic.

      Your brakes are probably leaking fluid because he did not service the cylinders when he replaced the pads. The new pads push the formerly exposed (and hence rusty) part up into the seals which wrecks them.

    13. Re:Reliability by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

      Um every brand of car marker produces lemons but on the whole Japanese cars are the most reliable. The worst thing you could do is to purchase an American car made in the last 25 years. Ugh.

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    14. Re:Reliability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i'd rather drive a Daimler Benz, thank you. But I agree on the American cars.

    15. Re:Reliability by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1
      hmm I went to supperior tire. I tend to like them. I will check it out.

    16. Re:Reliability by cr0sh · · Score: 1
      Personally, I think my Bronco has proven it's reliabilty (though yes, it has had a good amount of work done on it, and more to be done - but show me any 20+ year old car that doesn't need such work - parts wear out). It still runs! It even passed emissions (6.6L/400ci V8 carbed engine with little to count for a computer)!

      I expect to drive my Ranger into the ground (140,000 miles on it since 1994 when it was built, and still going strong - I have heard stories of Rangers going for 250,000+ miles - technically, my Bronco is a Ranger, so in theory this may be truth - of course, I don't think you can count an engine rebuild on that)

      Yes, every car manufacturer does produce lemons, and yes, there are a lot of old Hondas and Datsuns being driven around everyday. But I don't have problems with either of my purchases. For now, I know that they both run. While some parts (ah, hell, who am I kidding - a lot of parts) are hard to find for the Bronco, they are still out there - and it is *very* easy to work on (just this evening fixed the steering shaft flex coupler in a couple of hours - lots of room to work in, easy to do).

      Finally, and most importantly of all - they are both *paid for*. I don't make payments on them, I do most repair work on them myself (unless it is something I don't understand or don't have the tools for). I don't have to worry about paying interest on them. I don't think I will ever buy another "new" car - any cars from here on out will likely be used cars purchased with cash...

      --
      Reason is the Path to God - Anon
    17. Re:Reliability by mitch_davis · · Score: 1

      > ALways something is breaking on it.

      Oh great, Yoda drives a Honda.

  28. Solar flares by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1
    I wonder if the solar flares could of damaged any of the electronics.

    1. Re:Solar flares by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      rtfa

    2. Re:Solar flares by Mukaikubo · · Score: 1

      Yes, but not the recent ones. The current theory is that a solar flare over a year ago devastated the power system.

  29. Strange but seemingly consistent by Un+pobre+guey · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I'm starting to get the impression that there is some sort of major hazard somewhere on the way to Mars. It seems that quite a few probes have been getting so beat up as to be partly or completely inoperable on arrival to Martian orbit.

    Does anyone have any hard data on the statistics of spacecraft survival for all known Mars missions? Am I incorrect?

    1. Re:Strange but seemingly consistent by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm starting to get the impression that there is some sort of major hazard somewhere on the way to Mars.

      Yes. It's called human engineering.

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    2. Re:Strange but seemingly consistent by DerekLyons · · Score: 0, Redundant
      I'm starting to get the impression that there is some sort of major hazard somewhere on the way to Mars. It seems that quite a few probes have been getting so beat up as to be partly or completely inoperable on arrival to Martian orbit.
      That impression arises from the fact that, other than the Moon, Mars is the closest and most often attempted, interplanetary mission. More missions equals more chances of failure, and more media coverage of the failure.
    3. Re:Strange but seemingly consistent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? I thought it got damaged by a 'solar flare', whatever that is.

    4. Re:Strange but seemingly consistent by CBob · · Score: 1

      The Martian Defense forces are doing a pretty good job of keeping the invaders away from strategic areas in spite of having to deal with another round of heavy budget cuts from the Planetary Overlords.

    5. Re:Strange but seemingly consistent by Un+pobre+guey · · Score: 1
      I, for one, welcome them.

      Not the cuts, the Planetary Overlords.

  30. Battle On! by jmkaza · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is going to be the best episode of Batttlebots ever!

    1. Re:Battle On! by pimpinmonk · · Score: 1

      My money's on the Beagle 2. That think can nip at the other bots' ankles like it's nobody's business!

  31. Those who ignore the past (future?)... by hendridm · · Score: 2, Funny

    Doc: No wonder this circuit failed. It says "Made in Japan".
    Marty McFly: What do you mean, Doc? All the best stuff is made in Japan.
    Doc: Unbelievable.

    1. Re:Those who ignore the past (future?)... by jasonhamilton · · Score: 1

      They neglected to put a huge tail fin and Type-R sticker on the probe. No wonder it didn't make it.

      --
      SearchIRC - Now with live chat directory!
  32. Doesn't matter to me... by tomdarch · · Score: 3, Funny

    Because it's a Nozomi Express Probe, I can't use my JRPass on it!

  33. It's true by sulli · · Score: 2, Funny

    They should have launched a Hikari first.

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
  34. Next time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Send a giant fighting robot.

  35. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by uncoveror · · Score: 1

    That is exactly it! It does not matter if the probe is from the US, Japan, Russia, the EU, or China. The Zhti Ti Kofft have had enough of Earth's snooping.

    --
    The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
  36. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by ThisIsFred · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Not to mention that no one really has the funds to build the super-probes of yesteryear, so this is unfortunately going to happen with greater frequency. Even looking back at the historic Mars missions where the US sent those super-probes, two out of eight failed before reaching Mars. This shows us that it really has nothing to do with Mars, it's a difficult feat to send probes to Mars even with gobs of cash to spend, and it is no less difficult now than it was decades ago.

    --
    Fred

    "A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
    -RMS
  37. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by DragonWyatt · · Score: 1

    Wait a minute, don't we have math and engineering to deal with all those problems (we certainly did in the 60's and 70's)?

    But the units matter.

    Is it just me, or does anyone else detect a sloppiness in our current program that didn't exist before? Maybe it's a symptom of the "Me! Now!" generation-X (and now gen-Y) attitude (disclaimer: I'm not even 30 yet).

    --
    Don't sweat the petty things. But do pet the sweaty things.
  38. Life Expectancy of Electronics in todays society by Merlinium · · Score: 1

    Well with the life expectancy of 6 months to 1 years for all of todays electronic products, The warranty is about to run out on the Mars mission space crafts, no wonder its failing, maybe they should have opted for the Extended Service plan. For only an addition $6,500,000 they could have had a 3 year warranty.

    --
    If firefighters fight fire and crime fighters fight crime, what do Freedom fighters fight?
  39. How the?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Heck did the parent get modded up insightful?!

    1. Re:How the?! by TRACK-YOUR-POSITION · · Score: 0

      did i not mention SUPER AMERICA MILITARY powers?! that is how

  40. Isn't it obvious? by El · · Score: 1

    The martians don't like having their picture taken.

    --

    "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

  41. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by Mukaikubo · · Score: 1

    Sure we know how to deal with them. It's called, "More and more layers of redundancy". Unfortunately, more redundancy means more cost and more weight, which translates to even more cost. And in the space-affairs budget environment since the mid-80s, the money's not there. Learn to deal with a 50% failure rate, as opposed to the 25% one of years gone by.

  42. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bravo. Well put!

  43. Here's The Deal! by Java+Commando · · Score: 1
    Common, people! No one has yet mentioned the possibility of a Monolith! I mean, THAT could be why so many Mars missions fail.

    Cripes.

    1. Re:Here's The Deal! by PakProtector · · Score: 1

      No, how about the fact that my ship (or part of it) is currently buried in Lacis Solis?

      --

      Edward@Tomato - /home/Edward/ man woman
      man: no entry for woman in the manual.
      "Qua!?"

  44. Interesting by nocomment · · Score: 4, Funny

    I guess I'll just stick with their VCR's and TV's.

    --
    /* oops I accidentally made a comment, sorry */
    /* http://allyourbasearebelongto.us */
  45. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by boy_afraid · · Score: 1

    Art Bell and his guest are right, even Richard Hoagland!

  46. Warranty work by kmahan · · Score: 1

    The problem is that "on-site" service plan isn't offered. So you have to bring it into the shop. But on the plus side "parts and labor" are included in the cost.

    --
    Invalid Checksum. Retrying.
  47. Damned Barsoomians! by The+One+KEA · · Score: 1

    They're already cranky about all the stories we write about them, so they're returning the favor by blowing up our probes!

    Stupid calots.

    --
    SCREW THE ADS! http://adblock.mozdev.org/ Proud user of teh Fox of Fire - Registered Linux User #289618
  48. solution to contamination? by igny · · Score: 3, Insightful
    There is no solution short of leaving Mars alone. Surely all probes crashed on Mars may have brought bacteria stubborn enough to survive preflight cleaning, the space flight and the entry. They may or may not thrive in future and have some long term effects. If anything, exposure to vacuum and solar flares may only aggravate situation forcing bacteria to mutate.

    But do we need any solution? After all, any manned expedition will surely affect Mars more than any probe before. Exploring Mars and fear of contamination are contradictory. There is a saying in Russia, if you are affraid of wolves, then dont explore the forest, meaning that if you want to explore something, you have to overcome your trivial fears.

    --
    In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. - Yogi Berra
    1. Re:solution to contamination? by Bendebecker · · Score: 1

      Dude, I think you missed the point. We are exploring Mars in search of life. If we bring it there oursleves and it overruns the planet, not only will it make any indigenous life even more difficult to find but it may also wipe out any indigenous life forms. Using your analogy, if your looking for a tree, then don't nuke the forest.

      --
      There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
      most of us won't be able to afford it.
      -- Lemmy
    2. Re:solution to contamination? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We are exploring Mars in search of answers, not necessarily life. There are many questions to be answered beyond "Is there life on Mars?". In fact, if it does get "contaminated", nobody'll even have to wonder about that one anymore :). For all we know the Martians have been waiting for a billion years for us to contaminate them so they can mutate into an atmosphere-generating plant, laying the foundation for future homeowners associations and whatnot.

    3. Re:solution to contamination? by glebfrank · · Score: 1
      We are exploring Mars in search of life.
      Not really. There is, almost certainly, no life on Mars, so searching for it is only one of the reasons for exploration. Another important reason is a prospect of actually doing something useful with Mars (AKA colonization.) For that purpose, contamination is irrelevant.
  49. Why on Earth did they use BSD then? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    They knew the OS was failing and yet they still went ahead and used it.

    Please can someone enlighten them about our good friend Tux.

    Thank you.

  50. The E-Bomb article mentioned earlier by t0qer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There was an article about microwave bombs earlier. Could a narrowband (laser type microwave) deliver power to a sattelite that far out? (The article mentions it's the power system failing)

    1. Re:The E-Bomb article mentioned earlier by kurtkilgor · · Score: 1

      Sure, if the satellite has a recieving dish and someone else has a transmitter :)

      Actually, a microwave beam could probably defrost their fuel if it were aimed at the craft. If we had missile defense space lasers, they could do that. But, we don't.

      Perhaps the probe could be maneuvered to just graze the Mars atmosphere enough to heat it up and defrost the fuel, then fire the rockets to put it in Mars orbit? Could be a long shot, but if there's no other choice . . .

  51. Five-year quest? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Shouldn't that be "five-year mission"? This is space, after all. The final frontier.

  52. except.. by rebelcool · · Score: 1
    we don't have $2 billion (in the 1970s money no less) to throw into it anymore.

    Yeah if we had limitless funds, we could build great probes that would work 5 times past their expected lifetimes.

    --

    -

  53. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by bryanthompson · · Score: 1

    When you have the "throw more money at the problem to fix it" mentallity every government agency (at least in the US) has, you're not going to find real solutions to problems like this.

    It used to be about innovation, pride, and accomplishment.

  54. Will it crash???? by Regul8or · · Score: 1

    Probably not, as long as they got the memo that a foot is different than a meter.

    1. Re:Will it crash???? by swordgeek · · Score: 1

      I'd be happy if people could figure out that a meter is different than a metre.

      --

      "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
  55. how hard can it be? by goat_of_wisdom · · Score: 2, Funny

    come on, guys -- it doesn't take a rocket scientist to.... uh..... nevermind.

  56. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by el-spectre · · Score: 1

    Art Bell can be really funny. I like to listen and just marvel at the shoddy logic that he and his guests pull out... my favorite 2 are:

    1) Well, if there's no proof that X (doesn't matter what X is) is false, than it's clearly true!
    2) X (the gov't, nasa, authority-of-choice) denied it, so you know it must be true!

    I feel bad for the occasional decent scientist who comes on the show, and who gets blindsided by some weird question like:

    (while explaining that we just got missed (1 million miles) by some big asteroid)
    "That's interesting... so, do you think aliens might be behind this? Why isn't the government telling us?"

    Now, I'll grant you that there are some weird things out there that science doesn't get yet (millions of credible people see ghosts, aliens, etc.), but this concept of "for lack of proof, any answer will do" is odd. Entertaining though...

    --
    "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
  57. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you listen to too much art bell.

  58. Re:YOU POMPOUS ASS by Un+pobre+guey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A rare eloquence, a marvelous economy of words; concise, yet expressive; direct, accessible language equally meaningful to the sage and to the barbarian. Moronic, perhaps, yet clear and precise.

  59. Japan's probe was MADE IN TAIWAN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thank god we have the MADE IN USA probes, otherwise a tremendous amount of scientific research would go neglected.

  60. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by nosredna · · Score: 1

    We have the engineering and math, but we also have a) greedy engineers b) greedy mathematicians c) greedy materials developers The more money these three take, the more the funding base has to be increased. With a publicly funded space program such as NASA, it gets extremely hard to ask for tax money. The need to beat the communists in space is gone now, so funding goes down, and mistakes are made. As soon as mistakes start getting made, public faith begins to disappear and it gets much harder to get the funding to fix the problems. Granted, some mistakes, such as the unit discrepancy in parent's links, are better solved by actually watching what you're doing and possibly adopting set standards within an organization than by throwing money at them, but those mistakes make it much harder to get funding to fix the problems that can be solved with cash.

  61. lack of ........ by tytyty · · Score: 1

    A headphone jack....

    --
    REAL penguins build their own kernels and binaries!
  62. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not the Art Bell Show anymore. He has only recently started back hosting two nights a week. The rest of the time it's hosted by George Noory and it's called Coast-to-Coast AM.

    Most of the guests are real flakes, but there are some who are great to listen to - Michio Kaku, e.g.. Check out the website to see who's coming up on the show and pick the good ones to hear. Ignore the flakes.

  63. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope you were saying that tongue-in-cheek. Hoagland used to be a relatively intelligent man, but over the last twenty years or so, he's gone off the deep end. The only way to prove to him that there is no face on Mars is to send his ass there on the first mission.

    Just as long as we all believe in Santa Claus, we'll be okay.

  64. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by habaneroburger · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Or maybe Mars is a long way away and it's really hard to build a machine that can be expected to work for months on end whilst being baked and simultaneously frozen after being placed in a vacuum and bombarded with radiation...

    Which leads me to think that it's a good thing we're not trying very hard to mount any manned missions to Mars in the near future. If mankind has so much difficulty getting a relatively small, unmanned probe into Martian orbit/onto Martian soil, think about how much harder it would be with a vastly larger craft that needs to keep complex life-support systems in running order the whole time, and then make a safe return trip.

    I know there are a lot of Slashdot readers who think we should be all gung-ho about exploring the Solar System, and that we should be willing to accept the much higher risk that goes along with such exploration, but it's starting to look like the odds of such a mission achieving the goals of taking men to Mars and returning them safely to Earth would be pretty slim. I don't think society is prepared to wager billions of dollars not to mention human lives on a venture with a 10% chance of success. Unless we discover that Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden are holed up on Mars with a big stockpile of WMD, that is.

  65. Yes and No by rarose · · Score: 2, Informative

    1. Orbiters are generally not sanitized to the level that landers are, so there is a higher chance of viable organisms on the Jap probe.

    2. I don't know about Japanese orbital policy, but NASA policy requires that probes be launched on an orbit that will cause it to slightly miss it's target.... then when it's almost at the planet the orbital bias is removed so that orbital insertion takes place. So if this were a NASA mission there wouldn't be contaimination if the probe died... it'd just happily whizz on by into a solar orbit.

    --
    --Rob
  66. Re:this proves it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Japanese are not in space. The Chinese, at least, have put a man there. So, the parent does make sense. Don't agree with it, though.

  67. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by ShadowBlasko · · Score: 1

    While I *do* know who Art is, and I will admit to listening occasionally, just for the entertainment value on long night drives, this makes me think of something else entirely.

    Larry Niven

    Specifically, it makes me think of Ringworld and The Ringworld Throne. I was not all that impressed with the book, but the concept of using magnetics to control a star as a huge gas laser was trippy.

    Now, we have all these probes headed towards Mars, and we suddenly get the most active period of solar disturbances in recent history.

    Some of these probes have apparently been damaged by the recent extreme solar flares.

    If you read the book, the control center for the "sun" lasers was where? On the map of... MARS.

    Hmmmm.... *smiles* Just too cool.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order- Ed Howdershelt Via Tass
  68. Everything will be decontaminated anyhow... by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 1
    In the cosmic scheme of things, there isn't much time left for this solar system, life-wise.

    Earth is doomed

    --
    This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
  69. obligatory Back to the Future quote by linuxtuba · · Score: 0

    'No wonder this circuit failed. It says "Made in Japan"' - Dr. Emmet Brown, 1955.

  70. Here's the real scoop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's Marvin the Martian blasting our probes because he's still mad at Bugs Bunny.

    Here's what the little bugger looks like. Marvin

  71. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by nyseal · · Score: 1

    lol, I get it!

    --
    [SIG] Remember Mattel handheld games?
  72. Makes you think... by TigerKR · · Score: 1

    If earthlings never reach Mars before they're extinct (or the Earth is obliterated), will future space travelers (or future Martians) attribute all the Earth junk left on Mars as early Martian artifacts?

    What if some artifacts on Earth aren't really from Earth?

    *Cue X-Files Theme*

    We're putting a lot of junk out into various parts of space. Makes you think...

  73. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by Mdalek · · Score: 1


    Or maybe Mars is a long way away and it's really hard to build a machine that can be expected to work for months on end whilst being baked and simultaneously frozen after being placed in a vacuum and bombarded with radiation. Then to put this complicated device on top of hundreds of tonnes of high explosive so that you can get it moving fifteen times faster than a rifle bullet with the objective of placing it somewhere near a body only slightly larger than the Moon?

    The alternative is to use ion based propulsion (as on the Beagle 2), but there are still hundreds of other factors to be controlled.
    With our current technology the prospect of getting humans to mars and back (in good health) is laughable, the main obstacle being the immense radiation levels which will have to be endured for months each way.
    Lead isnt practical as it adds too much weight to the hull. Current sheilding methods on the ISS (which remains within the Van Allen Belts) are mainly polythene based with water storage around sleeping quarters.

  74. Voyager anyone? by Avihson · · Score: 1

    "Or maybe Mars is a long way away and it's really hard to build a machine that can be expected to work for months on end whilst being baked and simultaneously frozen after being placed in a vacuum and bombarded with radiation....."

    I cut the rest of the comment, since probes have made it to Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, and have even left the solar system.

    If we take it as fact that we have at one time overcome the above stated issues, it comes down to one of two things, Martians or decline in quality and work ethic. I can find proof of the decline, I haven't found any proof of little green (wo)men!

    Now are the Martians conspiring to dumb down the youth of the world? Let me put on my tinfoil thinking-hat and get back to you!

    1. Re:Voyager anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      since probes have made it to Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, and have even left the solar system.

      More specifically, everything we have launched to everywhere except Mars seems to have made it (I'm talking about unmanned vehicles here). Unless I'm forgetting something (and I might be), all of the other planetary exploration probes have performed as well or better than expected. We've even landed a probe on a moving asteroid. So all this talk about "gosh it's just so difficult because Mars is so small and reeeeeeal far away" is just so much crap.

      And yes, there is something uniquely screwed up happening to the probes heading to Mars that is not due to:
      Mars being too small.
      Mars being very far away.
      That evil space environment.
      Any one country's work ethic.

    2. Re:Voyager anyone? by mikerich · · Score: 1
      More specifically, everything we have launched to everywhere except Mars seems to have made it

      You're forgetting something - well two things actually. The missions to Venus by the Soviets and the Americans were also beset with repeated failures. The Pioneer probes very nearly didn't survive their encounters with Jupiter's radiation belt, Voyager was nearly crippled by a ring particle when it passed Saturn, Galileo had repeated failures...

      But why did the big probes survive? Because they were EXPENSIVE, they were built like tanks. Thanks to budget cutting at NASA, the Mars probes of late have been small and light with no room for redundancy.

      The 'smaller, faster, cheaper' strategy also put an unbearable strain on quality control.

      Hence the failures.

      Best wishes,
      Mike.

  75. Japanese Deception by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I live in Japan and have been hearing frequently deceptive information made by japanese organizations. I am starting to believe that, for some reason, the japanese have a real problem with truth and reality.

    Recently there have been serious problems with radioactive leakage at nuclear reactors and the japanese companies responsible did initially lie to the public (and the government) about the real situation.

    The japanese economy is going through a serious recession and one of the problems is the false statements made from the financial organizations.

    Statistics about social trends and problems are dubituous, not to say manipulated. e.g., AIDS statistics.

    Discrimination and human rights violations are common, yet the reality is covered by the local news and authorities.

    Double standard and unclear laws, even for the japanese themselves, are quite common.

    Due to things like these and some others, I have been loosing respect and trust for the japanese, both at a personal and professional level.

    1. Re:Japanese Deception by repetty · · Score: 1

      You obviously don't read slashdot enough and have made a mistake...

      All those bad things you wrote about? They refer to America, you fool.

    2. Re:Japanese Deception by kahei · · Score: 1


      Yeah, the Ibaraki reactor leak was insane -- the threat of radiation wasn't that scary, but the constant 'there is nothing wrong... the atom is your freind... this is someone else's fault... stay indoors and look happy or die...' announcements were terrifying.

      --
      Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
  76. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by javiercero · · Score: 1

    Actually Mars is way bigger than the moon, it is slightly smaller than Earth though.

  77. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One more reason why Mars is no place to raise a kid. Ooooo, I'm channeling Shatner!)

    I thought that was an Elton John lyric...

    And it's "Mars ain't the kind of place to raise a kid."

    Pedantically yours,
    Mal the Elder

  78. Ruri... by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

    ... probably has something to say about it...

    --
    Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    1. Re:Ruri... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      go team poorly placed nadesico reference

  79. Reliability? by alizard · · Score: 1
    Wow...and here I was thinking a Lexus or a Honda was a well put together reliable car. But NO, they can't even make a probe that lasts longer than several hundred lightyears. What kinda mileage is that?!

    That's why it's called "rocket science". Because this is not easy.

  80. Hmmm... by DaneelGiskard · · Score: 1

    Mars Express is due to enter Martian orbit on Christmas Day and send a British-built Beagle 2 lander to the surface, while the NASA rovers should arrive on Jan. 3 and Jan. 24.

    I can see it now. Robot Wars on Mars! :)

  81. Call bullshit by Mammothrept · · Score: 2, Informative



    Ignore the conspiracy theory nutjobs blaming aliens for damaging the Japanese probe. There probably is something wrong (as in intentionally untrue) about this story but there is a simpler and more human explanation for it. If JAXA's version of events is correct, this is the third space vehicle they've had die recently because of solar flares. (See http://www.spacedaily.com/2003/031031090646.2kxsn1 mx.html).

    They lost Midori-2 and Kodama in October, both supposedly due to solar flares. According to a friend who works on the Midori program, they really don't know what went wrong. The power started fading and over the course of several hours, went from about 6Kw of power to 1Kw. If a solar flare killed Midori-2, the power should have dumped quickly. Despite not knowing why it died, they blamed solar flares. My guess is that flares got the blame because that way, it is nobody's fault. Given how unforthcoming JAXA has been about Nozumi, I would not take their explanation of Nozumi's problems at face value unless they also release credible data showing cause and effect.

  82. Moderators suck. by SharpFang · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Now what does THIS mean?
    At one time parent post (the one +5 now) was "0, Troll". It would signify some of its informations are purposedly false. So I asked if someone could point out what is false - if anything is, because I would like to know whether I can depend on that info or just someone who shouldn't, became a moderator. And now I still don't know whether that post is true or false, only that some people here definitely feel bad about investigating the truth and are ready to waste their mod points in order to prevent revealing it.

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  83. Solar flares? by HeghmoH · · Score: 1

    Yeah, right. I gave that same excuse to my boss yesterday when he asked why his e-mail wasn't working. Do they really think we're going to believe something that lame?

    --
    Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
  84. Does decontamination matter? by PsiPsiStar · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't there be a regular exchange of any existing genetic information between planets already? There are meteorites from Mars found on earth. They weren't steralized. Do the enclosures and pockets of a lander make a big difference? Is a little bacteria okay, but a lot (or a larger variety of bacteria) dangerous? If bacterial contamination was going to happen, wouldn't it have already done so, at least to a very small degree?

    I understand erring on the side of caution, but how likely is it that these saftey measures will really accomplish anything?

    --

    ___
    It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
  85. Re:Get Toyota. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have a 1992 Toyota corolla with almost 647K miles on it. Here's some reliability data.

    alternator(dealer not after market)-- lasts 340K miles. Only reason it goes out is the carbon contacts wear down. The after market ones last 60K miles.

    o2 sensor-- last 240K miles whereas american car o2 sensors only last 60K.

    water pump -- lasts 230K miles so far. Only replace twice due to seal leaks.

    radiator -- once at 540K miles due to just wear-n-tear. Was getting blockage in radiator fins causing air conditioning to shut down when the temp gauge approaches 75% of max(safety feature) only when driving in the desert heat.

    batteries-- every 3 years.

    Known engineering defects -- the only known engineering design defect with the corolla is the exhaust manifold and down pipes. Have replaced each one 3 times. Exhaust manifolds crack (in the V groove where each cylinder pipe comes together into one pipe) and the inner pipes breaks its weld in the down pipe.(between exhaust and converter).

    expect to take it to 1Mil miles in the next 3-4 years. Only 350K more miles to go at 70-80K miles per year.

    Also have a 1990 camry with 80K which I don't drive that much since it's the luxury car.
    The corrolla is a commuter and the 4x4 car. It's
    gone up pikes peak, up Mt Rainer, to Vancouver Canada, thru the canyon lands Utah, Glacier national park, mexico and all over the deserts and mountains of Colorado,AZ, NM, Texas,(paved and dirt roads). As long as there is clearance beneath the vehicle it will be driven there! Was never stranded!!!! Although I've replaced 14 windshields in it due to construction zones on highways vs. back road trips.

    However, one has to maintain the car with the usual items that need maintenance: belts, fluids, tires, brakes and tires.

  86. the beagle will fail by ShadowRage · · Score: 1

    the beagle will probably fail, because once it gets to mars, it'll get a sniff of uranus and run off into inifinity and never be seen again.

    1. Re:the beagle will fail by fire5ign · · Score: 1

      The Beagle 2 will probably do just fine, unless, of course, some of the electrical engineers responsible for the craft are ex-Lucas.

    2. Re:the beagle will fail by ShadowRage · · Score: 1

      if you understood dogs, you'd understand my joke.
      beagles are hunting dogs, however, they arent bright.
      you let them loose, you'll NEVER see them again..

      except on the freeway, or in someone else's home.
      they catch a scent, and they'll follow it.

  87. The Martians by essreenim · · Score: 1

    It does not need to commit suicide. The Martians are reponsible for all the other losses. They got pissed off with our trade embargos against them, and our descision to end bilateral peace negotiations. Apparently tourists are no longer welcome on Mount Olympus Mons either. Damn reds!! Whe will people see the truth?

  88. Contamination by batquux · · Score: 1

    Is the probe some sort of genesis torpedo that will turn Mars into a lush rainforest planet on impact? Even if it does contaminate its crash site, or even everything within a few thousand miles of it, it's not likely to interfere with the next 3 probes' search for fossilized bacteria. I understand it's not ideal for good science, but if it happens...big deal.

  89. Does this mean that Negral will have to build... by monopole · · Score: 1

    ...the Martian Successor Nadesico probe?

  90. Re:Probe Redundancy - Actually... by tomzyk · · Score: 1
    The martian probe success rate is so bad that maybe space agencies should launch multiple smaller ones with the expectancy that some will fail to reach their destination than put all their hopes on one larger probe.
    Actually, research has already gone into something like that: Intelligent Satellite Teams for Space System

    I know I've read about more than just micro/nano-technology for this too, but I can't find it in my bookmarks at the moment. Check out more NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts here.
    --
    Karma: NaN
  91. Japanese Deception response by tomzyk · · Score: 1

    Interesting, but I'm not quite biting yet.

    First of all because you say you're living in Japan and yet you post anonymously. (Not that a Slashdot name of "Hiro" is gonna make me think you're really living there or anything; I'm just frequently untrusting of anonymous authors making wild accusations on here.) Secondly, you make accusations but failed to provide any proof, for either the "false" press releases or the "truth" that came out afterwards.

    Again, I'm not saying you made all of it up; I'm just asking for some proof from you to back up your claims.

    --
    Karma: NaN