When China, India and Russia go to the Moon to stay the US will say "boring, we're going to Mars" and then 20 years will pass and nothing will happen, and then the lunar colonists will do that too.
First of all, it's Ares I. ARES is a completely different project.
The reason why Ares I has costed billions of dollars is that they are trying to develop the next generation of aviation development tools.
See, ever since the 60s rockets have been developed much the same way people write software. You hack something together and then you test it. If it blows up, you add a patch or two to the design, build another one and test it. Repeat until you get a rocket that flies n times without any major faults, where n is some large number.
The shuttle was slightly different. A lot of analysis was done before it was built so a much smaller test program was required. But it was still very empirical and required lots of wind tunnels and gray beards.
With the Ares class boosters the goal is to develop modeling and simulation tools that allow comprehensive analysis of the design in the computer. That way when the first booster is built it will work first time. The Ares I-X flight we just had was not a test flight of the Ares I design, it was vaguely similar in profile but it wasn't a test flight in the traditional sense. The point of the flight was to get ground truth data for the simulations. It was about sensors.
So when NASA finishes developing these modeling and simulation tools, they'll try out a bunch of Ares I designs and then build it and put humans on it and fly it.. no tests. Then they'll design Ares V, try out a bunch of designs in the computer, then build it and fly it on a mission.. no tests.
That's NASA's job, to push the frontier.
Now, with all that in mind, what do I think of this? I think this will be as successful as "formal methods" in software engineering.. a really expensive way to get a false sense of security. I think the majority of accidents in rocketry are caused by the things you *can't* model. It's caused by a faulty part not being checked properly. It's caused by someone leaving a hose connected for too long because they've never used a pressure gauge because most of them are faulty and no-one ever does anything when they complain. It's caused by engineers telling flight controllers that hardware is not rated for operation under current conditions and the flight controllers demanding the engineers prove that the hardware will fail before calling a scrub. I think the only way to make rockets is to test test test, because reality is a harsh critic.
By March, the researchers plan on finishing a one third-size, hover-capable Puffin demonstrator, and in the three months following that they will begin investigating how well it transitions from cruise to hover flight. They are already looking past the Puffin, however.
And that's why we'll never see a full sized vehicle.
The next-generation of this design might incorporate more than just two pairs of prop rotors, so that if one was struck by, say, a bird or gunfire, the aircraft could survive on redundant systems. "We could make it so there's no single point of failure--that's the cool next step," Moore says.
Ya know what a cool next step would be? Actually making the vehicle.
Uhhh.. excuse me? I think my experience says the opposite. Even if you have *no problems* getting an account setup, the fact that you need to fuck with your router to activate a game is ridiculous. Shit, the fact that you need an internet connection to play a single player game is ridiculous.
A mate of mine, who just wanted to play a game he bought in the store, had so much trouble with the Steam activation process that he called me over to check it out. I thought "oh dear, another silly friend who can't work his computer".. then I discovered all the shit I had to do to get Steam to work. Opening ports on his router? Just to activate? Are you fucking kidding me? We eventually got the game to activate, then it wouldn't let us log into Steam, so the game wouldn't play.
"Incorrect password".. no it's not you stupid piece of shit. Ok, fine "I forgot my password".. "we're emailing you a reset code".. "umm.. I haven't gotten it".. "I forgot my password".. "we're emailing you a reset code".. "ahh, this time it showed up".. "ok, change your password, enter your username and reset code, and a new password".. "ok, reset code accepted, you are now logged in to the website".. awesome, I'll just try this password on Steam now shall I?.. "Incorrect password".. "Motherfucker, I changed the password, I know what it is, I'm cut&pasting it from the notepad I used to change it!".. "Incorrect password".. "Grrrr... Ok.. I'll wait 15 minutes, it probably takes a while to get from the web interface to the Steam interface" [15 minutes later] "Incorrect password". Grrrrrr... fine, back to the website, "Change password" "You are not logged in, please login to change your password." Ok... maybe it timed out, username/password, "Login" "You are logged in" WTF? You admit that I know the password on the website but you refuse to accept it in Steam? Fine, "Change password" "You are not logged in, please login to change your password." What, THE, FUCK? You just said I was logged in, YOU SAID IT. Now I wanna change my password I can't? Fuck you. "I forgot my password". "We're sending you a reset code.." Sure you are.. wait... wait.. "Hey man, wanna watch a movie or something?".. 20 minutes later.. "Hey! The reset code showed up!", "ok, change your password, enter your username and reset code, and a new password".. "ok, reset code accepted, you are now logged in to the website".. Back to Steam we go.. "Incorrect password".. fuck you Steam, fuck you in your stupid ass. "New Account" "Ok, to create a new account you need to choose a username".. I'll just enter the same username as before.. "That username is taken, we recommend these alternative usernames..." Fine, whatever, that one with 69 on the end, sounds great. "Please supply a password." Cut&Paste from this notepad, twice, now tell me it's wrong. "Password acceptable, here's your new account!" Great, I'd like to play the game now please. "The game must be activated, please enter your activation code." Sure, no worries, here ya go.. "Activation code duplicate error. You can not continue with your activation."
It's not going to kill journalism - it's just going to thin it out.
Pah. Journalism has killed journalism. Your typical "journalist" these days is a person who rewords a company's press release and sources a relevant picture.
When was the last time you read an article that included a direct quote? Or asked someone a pertinent question? Or hell, even showed any knowledge of the subject material?
For online publications you typically get more journalism from the comments section. "Hey, they said it was coming out this month in the last press release. Why the delay?" "XYZ happened."
Gah. Why does this stupidity keep getting repeated?
IE6 comes installed with Windows XP.. you can't uninstall it. For people who *never* use IE, that's the version we're going to have installed.
The problem here is that Acrobat Reader was embedding IE to display some user controllable elements. So the attack is:
1. Send the target a PDF. 2. They open it in Acrobat Reader. 3. Acrobat Reader loads up IE to display some elements of the PDF. 4. The embedded code triggers and exploit in IE. 5. Arbitrary code execution follows.
And yes, it is a totally lame attack but it works because:
* Way too many people use Acrobat Reader to read PDFs (monoculture) * IE can't be uninstalled, and no-one updates a browser they don't use.
The real key demand for this technology is launching propellants to an orbital depot. The political climate has changed (temporarily I would say) so it's ok to talk about propellant depots again. ULA are doing some interesting research. That's actual hardware being risk reduced there. Once you have propellant on-orbit you can plan deep space missions using Soyuz class vehicles - going beyond LEO doesn't need Saturn class launchers. That's the cost comparison that we have to look at.. not "is it cheaper than Soyuz?" but "is it cheaper than Apollo?"
It's so unfortunate that the press seems unwilling these days to dig even a *little* to get the story. Slashdot is linking to a blog, which is linking to Popular Science which is unwilling to even link to the company's website which has that tech talk embedded. It's like a 21st game of "telephone" and the message gets degraded at every retelling!
Sigh, even if you could launch at that high velocity you still wouldn't get a circular orbit. The point of the cannon is to replace the first stage of a multi-stage rocket.
Wow, that article is horrid. They don't even mention Hunter's startup company: Quicklaunch. On that page you'll find his Google Tech Talk on the subject which answers many of the questions that people are asking here.
Another way to look at it is that if every single order has to be entered into a command terminal somewhere and the robots in the field are logging all their own "decisions" then you've got a perfect information situation for tribunals.
"An atrocity occurred and we have the logs to prove it!"
Slashdot Mirror
Deal.
When China, India and Russia go to the Moon to stay the US will say "boring, we're going to Mars" and then 20 years will pass and nothing will happen, and then the lunar colonists will do that too.
First of all, it's Ares I. ARES is a completely different project.
The reason why Ares I has costed billions of dollars is that they are trying to develop the next generation of aviation development tools.
See, ever since the 60s rockets have been developed much the same way people write software. You hack something together and then you test it. If it blows up, you add a patch or two to the design, build another one and test it. Repeat until you get a rocket that flies n times without any major faults, where n is some large number.
The shuttle was slightly different. A lot of analysis was done before it was built so a much smaller test program was required. But it was still very empirical and required lots of wind tunnels and gray beards.
With the Ares class boosters the goal is to develop modeling and simulation tools that allow comprehensive analysis of the design in the computer. That way when the first booster is built it will work first time. The Ares I-X flight we just had was not a test flight of the Ares I design, it was vaguely similar in profile but it wasn't a test flight in the traditional sense. The point of the flight was to get ground truth data for the simulations. It was about sensors.
So when NASA finishes developing these modeling and simulation tools, they'll try out a bunch of Ares I designs and then build it and put humans on it and fly it.. no tests. Then they'll design Ares V, try out a bunch of designs in the computer, then build it and fly it on a mission.. no tests.
That's NASA's job, to push the frontier.
Now, with all that in mind, what do I think of this? I think this will be as successful as "formal methods" in software engineering.. a really expensive way to get a false sense of security. I think the majority of accidents in rocketry are caused by the things you *can't* model. It's caused by a faulty part not being checked properly. It's caused by someone leaving a hose connected for too long because they've never used a pressure gauge because most of them are faulty and no-one ever does anything when they complain. It's caused by engineers telling flight controllers that hardware is not rated for operation under current conditions and the flight controllers demanding the engineers prove that the hardware will fail before calling a scrub. I think the only way to make rockets is to test test test, because reality is a harsh critic.
Yes, and he's been doing that for nearly 15 years now.
You're not the first person to tell him that he writes like a retard and you won't be the last.
Where is the profit motive?
7 people have paid between $25M and $35M to fly to the ISS in the last 9 years. That rate has been held back by the availability of seats.
By March, the researchers plan on finishing a one third-size, hover-capable Puffin demonstrator, and in the three months following that they will begin investigating how well it transitions from cruise to hover flight. They are already looking past the Puffin, however.
And that's why we'll never see a full sized vehicle.
The next-generation of this design might incorporate more than just two pairs of prop rotors, so that if one was struck by, say, a bird or gunfire, the aircraft could survive on redundant systems. "We could make it so there's no single point of failure--that's the cool next step," Moore says.
Ya know what a cool next step would be? Actually making the vehicle.
This would be because your router is wide freakin' open.
Like all other software? Why, yes, yes I do expect to be able to play a retail game on computer in a network DMZ.
Uhhh.. excuse me? I think my experience says the opposite. Even if you have *no problems* getting an account setup, the fact that you need to fuck with your router to activate a game is ridiculous. Shit, the fact that you need an internet connection to play a single player game is ridiculous.
Activation is via Steam..
A mate of mine, who just wanted to play a game he bought in the store, had so much trouble with the Steam activation process that he called me over to check it out. I thought "oh dear, another silly friend who can't work his computer".. then I discovered all the shit I had to do to get Steam to work. Opening ports on his router? Just to activate? Are you fucking kidding me? We eventually got the game to activate, then it wouldn't let us log into Steam, so the game wouldn't play.
"Incorrect password" .. no it's not you stupid piece of shit. Ok, fine "I forgot my password" .. .. "umm.. I haven't gotten it" .. "I forgot my password" .. .. "ahh, this time it showed up" .. .. .. awesome, I'll just try this password on Steam now shall I? .. .. "Motherfucker, I changed the password, I know what it is, I'm cut&pasting it from the notepad I used to change it!" .. .. "Grrrr... Ok.. I'll wait 15 minutes, it probably takes a while to get from the web interface to the Steam interface" .. 20 minutes later.. "Hey! The reset code showed up!", .. .. Back to Steam we go .. .. fuck you Steam, fuck you in your stupid ass. "New Account" .. I'll just enter the same username as before.. ..." Fine, whatever, that one with 69 on the end, sounds great.
"we're emailing you a reset code"
"we're emailing you a reset code"
"ok, change your password, enter your username and reset code, and a new password"
"ok, reset code accepted, you are now logged in to the website"
"Incorrect password"
"Incorrect password"
[15 minutes later] "Incorrect password". Grrrrrr... fine, back to the website, "Change password"
"You are not logged in, please login to change your password." Ok... maybe it timed out, username/password, "Login"
"You are logged in" WTF? You admit that I know the password on the website but you refuse to accept it in Steam? Fine, "Change password"
"You are not logged in, please login to change your password." What, THE, FUCK? You just said I was logged in, YOU SAID IT. Now I wanna change my password I can't? Fuck you. "I forgot my password".
"We're sending you a reset code.." Sure you are.. wait... wait.. "Hey man, wanna watch a movie or something?"
"ok, change your password, enter your username and reset code, and a new password"
"ok, reset code accepted, you are now logged in to the website"
"Incorrect password"
"Ok, to create a new account you need to choose a username"
"That username is taken, we recommend these alternative usernames
"Please supply a password." Cut&Paste from this notepad, twice, now tell me it's wrong.
"Password acceptable, here's your new account!" Great, I'd like to play the game now please.
"The game must be activated, please enter your activation code." Sure, no worries, here ya go..
"Activation code duplicate error. You can not continue with your activation."
FUCK YOU STEAM.
Pfffffffffft... It's an urban myth made up by kiwis to make themselves feel special, pay no attention to it.
Huh? Are you unaware of what a continent is? Get this, India (and Sri Lanka) are both in Asia! Amazing I know.
Please see the last NVIDIA linux drivers story.. for fuck sake.. it's only been a month.
http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/12/11/1556237
Go argue with last month.
Yes, and? NZ is just an island of the continent of Australia. It'd be like having a Linux North America conference in Canada, or Hawaii. mmm.. Hawaii.
yes, Nouveau.. its referring to a previous Slashdot story late last year:
http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/12/11/1556237
And yes, that link could have been supplied, but that would require some sort of editing.
It's not going to kill journalism - it's just going to thin it out.
Pah. Journalism has killed journalism. Your typical "journalist" these days is a person who rewords a company's press release and sources a relevant picture.
When was the last time you read an article that included a direct quote? Or asked someone a pertinent question? Or hell, even showed any knowledge of the subject material?
For online publications you typically get more journalism from the comments section. "Hey, they said it was coming out this month in the last press release. Why the delay?" "XYZ happened."
Gah. Why does this stupidity keep getting repeated?
IE6 comes installed with Windows XP.. you can't uninstall it. For people who *never* use IE, that's the version we're going to have installed.
The problem here is that Acrobat Reader was embedding IE to display some user controllable elements. So the attack is:
1. Send the target a PDF.
2. They open it in Acrobat Reader.
3. Acrobat Reader loads up IE to display some elements of the PDF.
4. The embedded code triggers and exploit in IE.
5. Arbitrary code execution follows.
And yes, it is a totally lame attack but it works because:
* Way too many people use Acrobat Reader to read PDFs (monoculture)
* IE can't be uninstalled, and no-one updates a browser they don't use.
End of story.
The real key demand for this technology is launching propellants to an orbital depot. The political climate has changed (temporarily I would say) so it's ok to talk about propellant depots again. ULA are doing some interesting research. That's actual hardware being risk reduced there. Once you have propellant on-orbit you can plan deep space missions using Soyuz class vehicles - going beyond LEO doesn't need Saturn class launchers. That's the cost comparison that we have to look at.. not "is it cheaper than Soyuz?" but "is it cheaper than Apollo?"
The question is answered in the tech talk... finish watching it.
It's so unfortunate that the press seems unwilling these days to dig even a *little* to get the story. Slashdot is linking to a blog, which is linking to Popular Science which is unwilling to even link to the company's website which has that tech talk embedded. It's like a 21st game of "telephone" and the message gets degraded at every retelling!
Sigh, even if you could launch at that high velocity you still wouldn't get a circular orbit. The point of the cannon is to replace the first stage of a multi-stage rocket.
Please do watch the techtalk at http://quicklaunchinc.com/ all your questions and more are answered.
Wow, that article is horrid. They don't even mention Hunter's startup company: Quicklaunch. On that page you'll find his Google Tech Talk on the subject which answers many of the questions that people are asking here.
Another way to look at it is that if every single order has to be entered into a command terminal somewhere and the robots in the field are logging all their own "decisions" then you've got a perfect information situation for tribunals.
"An atrocity occurred and we have the logs to prove it!"
Some do.. the attack we're all talking about though, did not.