So a suit with no life support is more complex than one with CO2 scrubbers, O2, and other functions in a large attachment?
Since when are we talking about suits with no life support? You said "Why not have a tethered backup for suits?" I assumed (quite reasonably, I'd maintain) that you meant as a backup to the suit's built-in life support.
Are you now talking about a permanent tether with no onboard system?
Why did we have tethered diving long before SCUBA? I'll give you a hint. on-board life support is more complex than tethered systems.
Then why is everyone using SCUBA these days instead of tethers?
A gameshow hosted by Bob Monkhouse. Every knows that.
You don't have to like it, but do you live under a rock?
Even if I knew what Cydia was (which I vaguely do, now), that still wouldn't tell me why they were upset that they hadn't had time to test the jailbreak.
Evad3rs' new iOS 7 jailbreak featured a Chinese app store that sold pirated software, and which was pulled from Evasi0n7 soon after launch.
Evasi0n7 is the name of the jailbreak?
Latest rumors say that the exploit used for Evasi0n7 was stolen by a certain person, offered up for sale, so the Evad3rs did a deal with TaiG instead.
TaiG is the name of the Chinese app store? Who's the "certain person," and why does them stealing it lead ("...so...") to the jail break creators doing this deal with TaiG?
Jay 'Saurik' Freeman of Cydia meanwhile isn't happy about the whole thing, saying he was given no time to test Evasi0n7."
What's Cydia, and why is it important that they have time to test the jailbreak?
Another brilliant summary made my copying and pasting a couple of paragraphs from the middle of the story.
At the very least, you could have linked to an article that a) gave context to the story and b) quoted the actual comment which caused all the fuss in the first place.
The criminals in the case of Alan Turing were the various government minions who kidnapped, imprisoned, and poisoned him.
You can disagree as vehemently as you like with the way he was treated, but none of the authorities' actions were illegal at the time. It's all very well us looking back at the horrible things our ancestors did with repugnance, but our descendants will probably do exactly the same to us.
You say tethers would solve any problem with life-support, so you tell me.
You don't seem to be trying to make it work, then showing short-comings, but instead trying to make it not work, and demonstrating your limited intelligence and problem solving.
Should be pretty easy to convince me otherwise, then, shouldn't it?
But, since you are just here for the argument, and not a discussion on suits, life support, or spacewalks...
But, since you aren't willing to defend your ideas or resolve the contradiction between your suggestion to build a spacesuit that is both simplermore complex at the same time...
Yes, because if I can't solve it for every possible situation you come up with, then the general premise must be false.
I didn't come up with it; it actually happened! Ensuring that problems that have previously occurred don't happen again or have less severe effects would seem to be a good place to start when looking to improve things.
Or the nay-sayer is more persistent than the person who suggests a correct course of action
You've suggested a course of action. You said it would solve any problem with the life-support system (and you've again just implied it to be "correct"). I gave an example of a real problem that recently occurred and asked how your solution would have solved it, and you dismissed it as a mere "detail."
NASA has publicly announced that they are looking for new suits because of limitations in the current ones.
Yes, and you're demonstrating why they didn't start their research by posting a question under Ask Slashdot.
If I agree with NASA, I'm an idiot.
No, if you declare your idea to be the correct solution without even considering a recent incident (or, for that matter, not being a NASA spacesuit engineer), you look a bit pompous. Same goes when you contradict yourself:
1. They should have built simpler... suits. 2. A tethered suit (like the early diving suits) would fix any problem with a life-support system. Why not have a tethered backup for suits?
but well, considering his accomplishment, he deserve pardon.
Why? Should a person's accomplishments mitigate their punishment for a crime?
If Turing is worthy of a pardon, anyone convicted under similar circumstances should be worthy of a pardon. If a pardon is even the right thing to issue, which is still a matter of some debate.
How will a quick attachment make any difference to my point? You'd need multiple ports installed around the station and you'd be adding complexity - not to mention holes - to what you've already said is an overly-complicated spacesuit.
I don't have sufficient details on the flooding helmet.
Then why do you sound like you think you're an authority on spacesuit and life support system design?
Why are you asking such details. You obviously don't care what my answer is, you don't like the idea. So why keep complaining?
Because I'm trying to demonstrate that "asking such details" is exactly the sort of thing that is required in this situation, and that you seem to think your solution is the obvious one without considering such details.
Who said anything about your strawman of "permanent".
It's not a very good back up if you have a catastrophic failure of your life support system and don't have time to plug in.
Plugging them into a ship-mounted support system would be trivial.
Trivial? You want to mount ports all around the station - you'll need them reachable in a reasonable amount of time, after all - all of which will require regular maintenance and checks (you don't want a port venting air or water unexpectedly), and you're introducing more complexity to the suits (which you were arguing to be made more simple).
Yes. Any problem with the man-carried life support system.
Unless the problem kills you before you can get yourself tethered (because as you've stated in another post, you weren't envisaging a permanent tether).
Actually, my example was going to be the flooding of a helmet, as occurred recently. How would your tether solve that?
Slashdot Mirror
So a suit with no life support is more complex than one with CO2 scrubbers, O2, and other functions in a large attachment?
Since when are we talking about suits with no life support? You said "Why not have a tethered backup for suits?" I assumed (quite reasonably, I'd maintain) that you meant as a backup to the suit's built-in life support.
Are you now talking about a permanent tether with no onboard system?
Why did we have tethered diving long before SCUBA? I'll give you a hint. on-board life support is more complex than tethered systems.
Then why is everyone using SCUBA these days instead of tethers?
It works okay for m... hey, waitaminute...
Oh, I see how you meant it to be read now - apologies.
Luckily there is a fairly short Slashdotted article linked in said summary that makes it all fairly clear.
FTFY :)
It's like saying "What's Full House?" in the 90s.
A gameshow hosted by Bob Monkhouse. Every knows that.
You don't have to like it, but do you live under a rock?
Even if I knew what Cydia was (which I vaguely do, now), that still wouldn't tell me why they were upset that they hadn't had time to test the jailbreak.
Evad3rs' new iOS 7 jailbreak featured a Chinese app store that sold pirated software, and which was pulled from Evasi0n7 soon after launch.
Evasi0n7 is the name of the jailbreak?
Latest rumors say that the exploit used for Evasi0n7 was stolen by a certain person, offered up for sale, so the Evad3rs did a deal with TaiG instead.
TaiG is the name of the Chinese app store? Who's the "certain person," and why does them stealing it lead ("...so...") to the jail break creators doing this deal with TaiG?
Jay 'Saurik' Freeman of Cydia meanwhile isn't happy about the whole thing, saying he was given no time to test Evasi0n7."
What's Cydia, and why is it important that they have time to test the jailbreak?
Another brilliant summary made my copying and pasting a couple of paragraphs from the middle of the story.
At the very least, you could have linked to an article that a) gave context to the story and b) quoted the actual comment which caused all the fuss in the first place.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-25484537
Short version: dumb PR woman tweets "Going to Africa. Hope I don't get AIDS. Just kidding. I'm white." Hilarity (and a sacking) ensues.
I don't belong to one, plain and simple, i am self inflicted loner.
You and a whole bunch of other people.
The criminals in the case of Alan Turing were the various government minions who kidnapped, imprisoned, and poisoned him.
You can disagree as vehemently as you like with the way he was treated, but none of the authorities' actions were illegal at the time. It's all very well us looking back at the horrible things our ancestors did with repugnance, but our descendants will probably do exactly the same to us.
What is the use case you are designing for?
You say tethers would solve any problem with life-support, so you tell me.
You don't seem to be trying to make it work, then showing short-comings, but instead trying to make it not work, and demonstrating your limited intelligence and problem solving.
Should be pretty easy to convince me otherwise, then, shouldn't it?
But, since you are just here for the argument, and not a discussion on suits, life support, or spacewalks...
But, since you aren't willing to defend your ideas or resolve the contradiction between your suggestion to build a spacesuit that is both simplermore complex at the same time...
Yes, because if I can't solve it for every possible situation you come up with, then the general premise must be false.
I didn't come up with it; it actually happened! Ensuring that problems that have previously occurred don't happen again or have less severe effects would seem to be a good place to start when looking to improve things.
Or the nay-sayer is more persistent than the person who suggests a correct course of action
You've suggested a course of action. You said it would solve any problem with the life-support system (and you've again just implied it to be "correct"). I gave an example of a real problem that recently occurred and asked how your solution would have solved it, and you dismissed it as a mere "detail."
NASA has publicly announced that they are looking for new suits because of limitations in the current ones.
Yes, and you're demonstrating why they didn't start their research by posting a question under Ask Slashdot.
If I agree with NASA, I'm an idiot.
No, if you declare your idea to be the correct solution without even considering a recent incident (or, for that matter, not being a NASA spacesuit engineer), you look a bit pompous. Same goes when you contradict yourself:
1. They should have built simpler ... suits.
2. A tethered suit (like the early diving suits) would fix any problem with a life-support system. Why not have a tethered backup for suits?
but well, considering his accomplishment, he deserve pardon.
Why? Should a person's accomplishments mitigate their punishment for a crime?
If Turing is worthy of a pardon, anyone convicted under similar circumstances should be worthy of a pardon. If a pardon is even the right thing to issue, which is still a matter of some debate.
Turing was innocent.
"Innocent" in the sense of guilty of a criminal act?
You may not like the way the law was back then, but he was guilty.
Demon seed ... say hi.
Is that what it was trying to do? Something of a communication gap there.
If one uses a 16:9 widescreen, they'd normally avoid that...
One will use one's browser however one wishes, and website designers might consider that.
How will a quick attachment make any difference to my point? You'd need multiple ports installed around the station and you'd be adding complexity - not to mention holes - to what you've already said is an overly-complicated spacesuit.
I never suggested using pounds as a unit of mass.
I don't have sufficient details on the flooding helmet.
Then why do you sound like you think you're an authority on spacesuit and life support system design?
Why are you asking such details. You obviously don't care what my answer is, you don't like the idea. So why keep complaining?
Because I'm trying to demonstrate that "asking such details" is exactly the sort of thing that is required in this situation, and that you seem to think your solution is the obvious one without considering such details.
He plead guilty to sodomy, which was not a crime.
He may have confessed to it, but how can he plead guilty to something which isn't a crime?
Besides which, his plea has no bearing on whether or not he committed a crime under the law at that time.
Who said anything about your strawman of "permanent".
It's not a very good back up if you have a catastrophic failure of your life support system and don't have time to plug in.
Plugging them into a ship-mounted support system would be trivial.
Trivial? You want to mount ports all around the station - you'll need them reachable in a reasonable amount of time, after all - all of which will require regular maintenance and checks (you don't want a port venting air or water unexpectedly), and you're introducing more complexity to the suits (which you were arguing to be made more simple).
How long has humanity been using cochineal as a dye? Madder? Saffron?
I never suggested using pounds as a unit of mass.
Using pounds (weight) as a measurement of something in a weightless environment makes just as little sense.
It would weigh that much if it wasn't in orbit, but it is, so it doesn't.
Yes. Any problem with the man-carried life support system.
Unless the problem kills you before you can get yourself tethered (because as you've stated in another post, you weren't envisaging a permanent tether).
Actually, my example was going to be the flooding of a helmet, as occurred recently. How would your tether solve that?
There already was an apology, several years ago.
What Mr Turing pled guilty to is not a crime.
No, it's not. But it was back then. Rightly or wrongly, it was a criminal act.
Come back in fifty years and see what's legal by then.
Anyone ever treated this way deserves a pardon and more, our most humble apologies.
It's all very well saying that, but morality is relative. You might well find our ancestors look back on us with much the same disgust.