If that were true, spam would be non-existent. That we still get it means at least *some* people who say they won't ever buy from spammers actually do.
i agree there might be more productive work, but it's not the governments right or responsibility to kill off an entire industry because that industry "bothers" some people.
NASA is legally obligated to have a disposal plan. Hubble has no, count'em *0* rockets of its own. There is currently (and I'm sure ever was) a retro package. It would seem the favored plan has always been retrieval by shuttle. NASM will probably get it, when all is said and done.
I see the lowest freebsd is #41. The lowest Solaris 8 is #49. Lowest linux is #48. Lowest Win2k is #47.
Those are the 3 OSen which comprise the top 10, which has 5 fbsd, 2 Solaris 8, 2 Win2k, and 1 linux.
Totals for the top 50 are 10 Freebsd, 15 linux, 8 Solaris 8s, 2 'Solaris', 12 Win2k, 1 NT4/Win98 box admin'ed by a crack smoking monkey, and a lone HP-UX. (I know missed one somewhere, but screw it...I'm not recounting.)
Now, what does this tell us? There are FreeBSD users at the top and bottom. Same for Solaris 8 and Win2k. Linux too. OS doesn't really seem to be much of a factor. Hardware and network reliability I would expect to be more relevant.
My conclusion? The people who chose these things, along with the OS, and setup and maintain them, to land themselves in the top 5 must have made better decisions than the rest. That the people who chose the most reliable hardware and networks also chose FreeBSD...well, it only goes to show.:-)
Wouldn't 10 g's on touchdown cause death by deceleration trauma?
Re:Not a weblog (Was:Mixed feelings)
on
Space Blog
·
· Score: 1
Yeah yeah, it was poetic license, sue me.
Re:What happens to Farts in weightlessness ???????
on
Space Blog
·
· Score: 1
They get sucked and filtered out by the a/c.
Re:What I thought we needed more of from NASA...
on
Space Blog
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Well see, there's thing thing here in the US known as "Congress", which is mostly a bunch of rich white guys who spend all the government's money. They like to spend it on stuff that will get them re-elected to said congress. What this generally means is spending the money on stuff people think is important. The problem NASA has is pushing all this boring (to the average person) science stuff. Ed Lu's letters show an enthusiasm and desire to entertain and educate the average joe. It's fun stuff to read (if space happens to be your bag), and hopefully if we could get more of this stuff out of NASA more people would get interested, say they'd like to see it have a higher priority to some focus group weasel, congress would send more $$$ NASA's way (they're getting about $14,000,000,000.02 this year, of which $5,000,000,000.02 is manned spaceflight), and I better end this runon sentence now. Compare those numbers with what the military gets, which is I think around $400,000,000,000.02, plus/minus $50,000,000,000.02. More money means more missions, and more successes.
People don't connect to robots. People don't usually connect to science. If NASA would realize this and push more stuff like http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/station/crew/exp7/lule tters/ maybe it could generate a little more excitement. After all, why do people race cars? Cuz remote controlled nascar would suck eggs.
Slashdot Mirror
...using much of the original software!
Didn't they do this on an episode of MASH?
"According to Agg over at OCAU, this is probably the reason for all the Mars probes launched over the last few months."
Does this really need to be said?
A likely story. Uh huh. Sure. No, I believe him.
If that were true, spam would be non-existent. That we still get it means at least *some* people who say they won't ever buy from spammers actually do.
1. I said "just about".
2. It was a tongue in cheek comment.
3. Tell me those exceptions can't be weasled into.
i agree there might be more productive work, but it's not the governments right or responsibility to kill off an entire industry because that industry "bothers" some people.
Dude, that's like the whole point of the ATF.
Except for the fact it doesn't. Just about the only person *not* exempted from calling people on the list is Homer and his auto-dialer.
I wonder if winning this lottery will become some sort of geek pride status symbol.
Where's the NEWS???
NASA is legally obligated to have a disposal plan. Hubble has no, count'em *0* rockets of its own. There is currently (and I'm sure ever was) a retro package. It would seem the favored plan has always been retrieval by shuttle. NASM will probably get it, when all is said and done.
The build I just d/l'ed is labeled 1.5b.
Erm, congress critters don't like giving money to people who can't vote for them.
There's more than a slight chance the orbital space "plane" could end up being a capsule.
I see the lowest freebsd is #41. The lowest Solaris 8 is #49. Lowest linux is #48. Lowest Win2k is #47.
:-)
Those are the 3 OSen which comprise the top 10, which has 5 fbsd, 2 Solaris 8, 2 Win2k, and 1 linux.
Totals for the top 50 are 10 Freebsd, 15 linux, 8 Solaris 8s, 2 'Solaris', 12 Win2k, 1 NT4/Win98 box admin'ed by a crack smoking monkey, and a lone HP-UX. (I know missed one somewhere, but screw it...I'm not recounting.)
Now, what does this tell us? There are FreeBSD users at the top and bottom. Same for Solaris 8 and Win2k. Linux too. OS doesn't really seem to be much of a factor. Hardware and network reliability I would expect to be more relevant.
My conclusion? The people who chose these things, along with the OS, and setup and maintain them, to land themselves in the top 5 must have made better decisions than the rest. That the people who chose the most reliable hardware and networks also chose FreeBSD...well, it only goes to show.
ITHM "top 10".
What would be best is building infrastructure, not flags & footprints.
Hella loud, hella bright, and hella fast. In fact, this launch climbed much much quicker than I've ever seen before.
Wouldn't 10 g's on touchdown cause death by deceleration trauma?
Yeah yeah, it was poetic license, sue me.
They get sucked and filtered out by the a/c.
Well see, there's thing thing here in the US known as "Congress", which is mostly a bunch of rich white guys who spend all the government's money. They like to spend it on stuff that will get them re-elected to said congress. What this generally means is spending the money on stuff people think is important. The problem NASA has is pushing all this boring (to the average person) science stuff. Ed Lu's letters show an enthusiasm and desire to entertain and educate the average joe. It's fun stuff to read (if space happens to be your bag), and hopefully if we could get more of this stuff out of NASA more people would get interested, say they'd like to see it have a higher priority to some focus group weasel, congress would send more $$$ NASA's way (they're getting about $14,000,000,000.02 this year, of which $5,000,000,000.02 is manned spaceflight), and I better end this runon sentence now. Compare those numbers with what the military gets, which is I think around $400,000,000,000.02, plus/minus $50,000,000,000.02. More money means more missions, and more successes.
It very well could be, if NASA didn't portray itself as so stodgy.
People don't connect to robots. People don't usually connect to science. If NASA would realize this and push more stuff like http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/station/crew/exp7/lule tters/ maybe it could generate a little more excitement. After all, why do people race cars? Cuz remote controlled nascar would suck eggs.
The name is obviously a subtle Tribute to Jim Oberg, *the* space geek.