While you make this point in jest, let me respond seriously. There's no point in making your backups (including disaster recovery facilities) so secure that they'd survive an event that would wipe out your entire business regardless. That's just a waste of money that could be better spent elsewhere.
I mean, sure, you could store your backups on the Moon so they'd survive a giant comet hitting the Earth, but if that happened you'd probably have more important things to worry about than recovering your data.
That said, and in light of SpaceX's recent success, perhaps there is a market for a Lunar data storage facility...
The implementation may be new (I don't know), but the idea isn't. Hold-down clamps have been around for a while, probably since at least the V-2 (A-4). The idea is to hold the thing down long enough for the engine(s) to build up enough thrust to lift properly, rather than just knock the rocket over.
The Shuttle had explosive bolts holding the SRBs down so the thing wouldn't blow over, either in a strong wind or when the SSME's lit. I'm not sure that they were strong enough to hold it down once the solids ignited, though (not that additional telemetry is going to do you any good at that point.)
Even if SpaceX succeeds beyond everyone's wildest dreams, Congress will start to meddle the way they do in defense contracts. "Sure, you can build rockets for us, but you have to build the nozzles in Maine, the bodies in Nebraska, join them in Utah, and ship the assembly by boat from Texas."
To which SpaceX could rightly say "Sure, we'll build the Falcon-9-G [for government] for you that way. It'll cost $400 million a pop. Or you could use the commercial off-the-shelf version for a quarter of that." SpaceX's business model is to do 2/3 of their business outside of the US govt. NASA doesn't have that option.
When the Shuttle was first in design mode, it was supposed to replace everything except Saturn V on the high end and Delta (much smaller then than today's version) on the low end.
However, after the last few Apollo moon landings were scrapped (the plans went to Apollo 20) and some of the hardware repurposed to Skylab (or in the case of two perfectly good Saturn Vs, lawn ornaments), the VAB and launch complexes 39 A and B (C was planned but never built) were reconfigured for Shuttle and thus rendered useless for stacking and launching an S-V. It was a cost-saving measure but meant the decision to never fly another S-V had been made.
And the scrapping was as much due to Congressional pressure as anything that Nixon decided -- some of those decisions had been taken toward the end of the Johnson administration.
The Saturn V could (and did) shut down 1 of it's 5 first stage engines and still go to the moon
Not at launch, it couldn't (and never did). An engine failure up to T+7.5 seconds would likely cause the vehicle to collide with the tower (it took a long time to clear the tower, launch thrust-to-weight ratio was low, and it's a tall tower) and would be problematic even after that.
Apollo 13 lost the center engine on the second stage two minutes early due to a faulty pressure sensor, the other four burned longer to compensate.
Also, a Saturn V launch cost about a billion dollars a shot. That's quite a bit more than Falcon.
The SpaceX spokeswoman compared it to a pilot doing an engine run-up and checking the gauges before take-off. They ran up the engines, didn't like what they saw on one of them, and shut it down.
Shuttle did something similar at least once, possibly twice: ignited the main engines, saw something out of spec, and shut them down before lighting the solids. (Once you light solids, you're going somewhere whether you like it or not.)
For that matter Gemini 6 (manned) did something similar with the engines lighting and the launch aborting before actual lift-off. In that case an electrical plug which was supposed to disconnect as the vehicle lifted off fell out when engines started. The computer saw that the plug was out but the vehicle hadn't moved and killed the engines. The astronauts should have ejected (if the Titan booster had lifted even a little it could have exploded when it fell back) but decided not to since they'd felt no motion (Schirra had experienced a Mercury launch). It launched successfully three days later.
If they're smart, FB will use the IPO money to buy businesses that actually have a product. If they do that, they be around in five years. If not, they may go the way of Myspace.
You're right, but not in the way you think. The Hooker Chemical Co. was forced (by local govt) to sell the land their chemical dump was under. They sold it with the proviso that nothing ever be built on it. The government later overruled that proviso.
Government is just people. Most of them (both in and out of government) are idiots. Personally I prefer to give idiots as little power as possible. Sure, they do some good things, but when they fuck up, they fuck up big time. Go ahead, dig into the housing crisis and Enron too, and you'll find fucked up government policies amplifying the bad that greedy individuals did.
I think that once in the fight, the Spitfire was better than the Mustang. The problem with the Spit was that it didn't have the range the Mustang did, hence it was more a defensive than offensive fighter. Perfect for the Battle of Britain, but less so for bomber escort.
By displaying this post, or storing it on its servers, Facebook hereby agrees to abandon any and all trademark claims to the word "book", notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the user agreement.
It's still up 21 minutes later (as I write this).
I suppose worst case is that they yank my FB account.
At least, not until tablets have haptic interfaces so I can use it while looking at the TV instead of at the damn remote^W tablet -- and is small enough to do so while holding it in one hand while pressing the virtual buttons (or gesturing) with my thumb.
Galaxy Quest was fun, and a parody that needed to be done. The Matrix was a rehash of SF memes that had been around forever, with a premise that didn't make a whole lot of sense (people as batteries? srsly?). Not that it wasn't great eye candy.
Perhaps it was simply that Galaxy Quest had spaceships and aliens, and The Matrix didn't. Actually, considering that the Hugos are fan-nominated and fan-voted (you just need to buy a membership in that year's Worldcon), the direct fan-appeal of Galaxy probably heavily influenced the vote. Heck, "Fuck Me, Ray Bradbury" was nominated last year -- up against episodes of "Dr. Who".
Sure, and they'd be, well maybe not happy, but willing to jump through the licensing hoops to allow such to run on those locked-down systems, or to purchase unlocked hardware.
Options that might not be available (or be prohibitively expensive, or require an inordinate amount of paperwork) to Joe Public.
IOW, never rely on big business to defend your freedoms for you. It turns out that businesses have freedoms that individuals don't.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, you're lucky if they even do marketing.
Sure, the books/authors you've heard about probably have some marketing behind them. That's a tiny fraction of the books published every month.
Most business-savvy writers go both routes, for reasons that become clear when you look at the long-term implications of most publishing contracts.
While you make this point in jest, let me respond seriously. There's no point in making your backups (including disaster recovery facilities) so secure that they'd survive an event that would wipe out your entire business regardless. That's just a waste of money that could be better spent elsewhere.
I mean, sure, you could store your backups on the Moon so they'd survive a giant comet hitting the Earth, but if that happened you'd probably have more important things to worry about than recovering your data.
That said, and in light of SpaceX's recent success, perhaps there is a market for a Lunar data storage facility...
The implementation may be new (I don't know), but the idea isn't. Hold-down clamps have been around for a while, probably since at least the V-2 (A-4). The idea is to hold the thing down long enough for the engine(s) to build up enough thrust to lift properly, rather than just knock the rocket over.
The Shuttle had explosive bolts holding the SRBs down so the thing wouldn't blow over, either in a strong wind or when the SSME's lit. I'm not sure that they were strong enough to hold it down once the solids ignited, though (not that additional telemetry is going to do you any good at that point.)
any launch that doesn't end with the rocket in a million flaming pieces is a good launch.
Sorry, but I'm afraid I'm going to have to steal that. It's too good not to.
Even if SpaceX succeeds beyond everyone's wildest dreams, Congress will start to meddle the way they do in defense contracts. "Sure, you can build rockets for us, but you have to build the nozzles in Maine, the bodies in Nebraska, join them in Utah, and ship the assembly by boat from Texas."
To which SpaceX could rightly say "Sure, we'll build the Falcon-9-G [for government] for you that way. It'll cost $400 million a pop. Or you could use the commercial off-the-shelf version for a quarter of that." SpaceX's business model is to do 2/3 of their business outside of the US govt. NASA doesn't have that option.
When the Shuttle was first in design mode, it was supposed to replace everything except Saturn V on the high end and Delta (much smaller then than today's version) on the low end.
However, after the last few Apollo moon landings were scrapped (the plans went to Apollo 20) and some of the hardware repurposed to Skylab (or in the case of two perfectly good Saturn Vs, lawn ornaments), the VAB and launch complexes 39 A and B (C was planned but never built) were reconfigured for Shuttle and thus rendered useless for stacking and launching an S-V. It was a cost-saving measure but meant the decision to never fly another S-V had been made.
And the scrapping was as much due to Congressional pressure as anything that Nixon decided -- some of those decisions had been taken toward the end of the Johnson administration.
The Saturn V could (and did) shut down 1 of it's 5 first stage engines and still go to the moon
Not at launch, it couldn't (and never did). An engine failure up to T+7.5 seconds would likely cause the vehicle to collide with the tower (it took a long time to clear the tower, launch thrust-to-weight ratio was low, and it's a tall tower) and would be problematic even after that.
Apollo 13 lost the center engine on the second stage two minutes early due to a faulty pressure sensor, the other four burned longer to compensate.
Also, a Saturn V launch cost about a billion dollars a shot. That's quite a bit more than Falcon.
The SpaceX spokeswoman compared it to a pilot doing an engine run-up and checking the gauges before take-off. They ran up the engines, didn't like what they saw on one of them, and shut it down.
Shuttle did something similar at least once, possibly twice: ignited the main engines, saw something out of spec, and shut them down before lighting the solids. (Once you light solids, you're going somewhere whether you like it or not.)
For that matter Gemini 6 (manned) did something similar with the engines lighting and the launch aborting before actual lift-off. In that case an electrical plug which was supposed to disconnect as the vehicle lifted off fell out when engines started. The computer saw that the plug was out but the vehicle hadn't moved and killed the engines. The astronauts should have ejected (if the Titan booster had lifted even a little it could have exploded when it fell back) but decided not to since they'd felt no motion (Schirra had experienced a Mercury launch). It launched successfully three days later.
If they're smart, FB will use the IPO money to buy businesses that actually have a product. If they do that, they be around in five years. If not, they may go the way of Myspace.
Small government gave us Love Canal,
You're right, but not in the way you think. The Hooker Chemical Co. was forced (by local govt) to sell the land their chemical dump was under. They sold it with the proviso that nothing ever be built on it. The government later overruled that proviso.
Government is just people. Most of them (both in and out of government) are idiots. Personally I prefer to give idiots as little power as possible. Sure, they do some good things, but when they fuck up, they fuck up big time. Go ahead, dig into the housing crisis and Enron too, and you'll find fucked up government policies amplifying the bad that greedy individuals did.
What happens when the hijackers get on the wrong side of the fortified door?
And how do they do that? Teleport?
I agree that if the terrorists have teleportation, we're well and truly fucked, but I'm not worried by the prospect.
The only challenge that I had was staying in the center of the road.
I'm not surprised, if anyone coming the other way was also trying to stay in the center.
I have (fraternal) twin sons. One is right handed, one left handed.
I think that once in the fight, the Spitfire was better than the Mustang. The problem with the Spit was that it didn't have the range the Mustang did, hence it was more a defensive than offensive fighter. Perfect for the Battle of Britain, but less so for bomber escort.
Do you really want it to be nuclear-powered?
Fuckin' a, bubba.
But just skip the atmosphere. If you really want to go that fast, go straight to orbit (and back, if so desired).
I just posted this on my Facebook page:
By displaying this post, or storing it on its servers, Facebook hereby agrees to abandon any and all trademark claims to the word "book", notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the user agreement.
It's still up 21 minutes later (as I write this).
I suppose worst case is that they yank my FB account.
No points to mod you up, but I thought it was funny.
But then I'm old enough to remember the song.
What do batteries have to do with it? Put the reactor in the car. Refuel once every few years.
Okay, still a few details to work out, but....
At least, not until tablets have haptic interfaces so I can use it while looking at the TV instead of at the damn remote^W tablet -- and is small enough to do so while holding it in one hand while pressing the virtual buttons (or gesturing) with my thumb.
Galaxy Quest was fun, and a parody that needed to be done. The Matrix was a rehash of SF memes that had been around forever, with a premise that didn't make a whole lot of sense (people as batteries? srsly?). Not that it wasn't great eye candy.
Perhaps it was simply that Galaxy Quest had spaceships and aliens, and The Matrix didn't. Actually, considering that the Hugos are fan-nominated and fan-voted (you just need to buy a membership in that year's Worldcon), the direct fan-appeal of Galaxy probably heavily influenced the vote. Heck, "Fuck Me, Ray Bradbury" was nominated last year -- up against episodes of "Dr. Who".
See Rule #2.
Just tell said boss in a written memo that connecting it up would cause the company to fail a SOX audit.
(I don't know if it really would, but it certainly should.)
Point a webcam at the monitor.
Howevermuch the TSA might want to get on the highways, though, Customs and Border Protection got there first.
It's all Department of Homeland Security, one big happy family.
Sure, and they'd be, well maybe not happy, but willing to jump through the licensing hoops to allow such to run on those locked-down systems, or to purchase unlocked hardware.
Options that might not be available (or be prohibitively expensive, or require an inordinate amount of paperwork) to Joe Public.
IOW, never rely on big business to defend your freedoms for you. It turns out that businesses have freedoms that individuals don't.