If a significant number of people quit their service and gave the feedback "there's just too many ads for a pay service" then maybe something would get done about it. But they don't.
Dude, I'm sure he gets letters from everyone. So if you really wanna make an impression, you need to give him a present. I think a chocolate gun would be a good present and you should run up to him really fast to give it to him.. because he's so busy.
Umm.. why would you do that? eco-terrorist is already a word.. it means one who does terrorism in the name of the environment, not one who does terrorism *to* the environment. That's always been the use of the -terrorist prefix.. or did you think Islamic Terrorist meant they were terrorizing Islam?
Oh please, you don't actually think aiding dissidents in a foreign country is legal do ya? The only thing stopping Iran from demanding the extradition of these people is that they are anonymous.. except for Eric S. Raymond, and who wants him in their country?
If we're really lucky, COTS will take over the ISS resupply and not only start selling seats to NASA, but to more spaceflight participants from the public. If that happens the ISS will likely survive beyond its 2016 use-by-date and NASA will be freed up to focus on the Moon and Mars.
The thing to remember, though, is that at some point Elon is going to send something to Mars. He's on the Mars Society board. It's the reason he started SpaceX in the first place.
You're right about SpaceX maybe being able to launch a capsule soon.. but not the Orion.
As for other rockets, no.. the ULA has specifically said it would take them 5.5 years to man rate a rocket.. and that's their estimate.. which, hopefully you know, is usually off by a factor of 3.
The X-Prize was designed to encourage the creation of a vehicle that would demonstrate the feasibility of a new market. It was backed up with a whole lot of market research which showed that people would happily sign up for a flight on such a vehicle. The anticipated business plan that it was trying to encourage was:
1. Build a vehicle that is very reusable and can put passengers into space. 2. Win the prize and get the PR. 3. Take bookings and reservation fees to fund the next flight. 4. Fly the first passengers in your winning vehicle. 5. Repeat 3, 4 until Profit!!
Unfortunately they didn't anticipate that some big personality like Burt Rutan would come along and do:
1. Convince an investor to invest *twice* the price to build a vehicle. 2. Win the prize and get the PR. 3. Use the PR to get more venture capital. 4. Took bookings and reservation fees for a new vehicle that hasn't even been built yet. 5. Never fly the winning vehicle again.. hang it in the Smithsonian like a freakin' monument or something. 6. Watch your schedule slip, try to catch up by cutting corners, have a fatal accident. 7. Announce that your vehicle will be delayed still more as you work on making it a "platform" for doing shit that wasn't in the original spec (can you say space shuttle?) 8. Demonstrate a fly over of your carrier aircraft, after having to delay the fly over due to malfunctions. 9. ?????? We're still waiting. 10. Profit?
I'm reading this thing so let me chime in with my annoyances as I read it.
Instead, we should stretch out the six remaining shuttle flights to 2015--one per year. Sure, that will cost money, but we can more than make up for it by canceling the troubled Ares I. In its place, we should use the old reliable Delta IV Heavy or the Atlas V satellite launchers, upgraded for human flight. (It won't take much.)
Sigh. I expect better from Buzz Aldrin - he's Buzz Freakin' Aldrin! What it "will take" is 6 years and the time it takes to build and gift new launch facilities to ULA. And that's their estimate. It will likely take longer. SpaceX says they can do it faster, but it's still not an Ares I class vehicle we're talking about here.
NASA should also step up its Commercial Orbital Transportation Services program to subsidize private rockets like the SpaceX Falcon 9, which could make its first flight any time now. SpaceX is also developing the Dragon capsule to fly seven astronauts to the space station.
Yah, more money for SpaceX.. I humbly agree with Mr Aldrin. However, even if SpaceX's COTS D capability was available tomorrow it would not dejustify the Ares I. They're two different launch vehicles with two different capabilities.
In the short term, some combination of an extended shuttle schedule and a new Orion/Delta, Orion/Atlas or Dragon/Falcon would fill the gap and give us the kind of continuity and flexibility we had during the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo programs. In the meantime, we need to develop new strategies, new launch vehicles and new spacecraft for the years beyond 2015 to bring us to the threshold of Mars.
Orion isn't ready and won't be ready for 6 years. Whining about the 5 year gap is not going to change that. Anyway, I can see that Mr Aldrin is now setting us up for the "love the Mars" speech.. so let me just say the ESAS specifically addressed the support needed for mating with a future Mars Transfer Vehicle and that is being studied right now.
The key to my medium-term plan is simple: Scrap our go-it-alone lunar program and let international partners--China, Europe, Russia, India, Japan--do the lion's share of the planning, technical development and funding. The U.S. would participate, and we would provide the technological leadership.
Wow, you actually want to lunar mission based on the International Space Station model?
To encourage more partners for both the lunar program and the space station, we should develop a manned spacecraft that other countries could afford to buy or lease.
Uh huh. So you're saying that other countries are interested in paying the small fortune the US spends to launch the shuttle? Or are you saying that if we just tried a little harder we could make the shuttle cheap and affordable? Aldrin, you're not this naive.
My alternative plan is simple math: Ares 3+3 is better than Ares 1+5. In other words, two medium-size Ares 3s would be a more efficient way to launch crew and cargo than a small crew-only Ares I and a huge cargo-only Ares V. NASA would require just one much less expensive rocket program.
Sigh, this again. Read the ESAS.. is that too much to ask?
If no commercial or mineral exploitation pans out, perhaps a few wealthy space tourists will pay $100 million for a lunar flyby.
Like they're lining up for the Soyuz flyby that is available right now?
To reach Mars, we should use comets, asteroids and Mars's moon Phobos as intermediate destinations. No giant leaps this time. More like a hop, skip and a jump.
For these long-duration missions, we need an entirely new spacecraft that I call the Exploration Module, or XM. Unlike the Orion capsule, which is designed for short flights around the Earth and to the moon..
Umm.. no. It's designed for lifting the crew to the station, or to an ERS/LSAM or to a mars transfer vehicle. Again, it's right there in the ESAS.
You've spoken to all of them have you? I remember seeing stats that barely 1% of us even comment, let alone express their opinion on copyright laws.
would be for a 10 year copyright
Which will grow 10 years every 10 years, retroactively.
with mandatory registration
That will be eliminated the first time someone claims they "forgot" to register, like it was back when we had mandatory registration.
decriminalization of personal file sharing
Woah! When did personal file sharing become criminalized? Shit, I better flush my burnt DVDs!!
and clauses that allow non-commercial use of a product if it is abandoned.
Why only non-commercial? The whole point of copyright is to financially encourage valuable activities that people would otherwise not do. If the original publisher no longer wants to publish the work and I think I can make some money publishing the work, then clearly there are people who want copies and are willing to pay for them, so why not encourage me to serve that need? Why reserve that right to someone who doesn't want it anymore?
Most/.ers
yeah, cause you know..
oppose criminalization of personal file sharing
I imagine a world where file sharing is illegal and actually enforced will be the end of personal computing.
long copyright such as the totally ridiculous life + 70 years
But.. but.. I did some work 20 years ago and my great grandchildren might have to get a job!!
the ability for things to be lost when they are abandoned
"lost" is the extreme.. how about just "rare". It's really quite sad that a book that has been in print only 5 years is so hard to get. These days I go to Amazon and click through the long list of secondhand book sellers (who, btw, the copyright owners would love to stamp out!) and eventually find one that will mail me the product for almost the same cost of new. It's a travesty.
and oppose unreasonable penalties for infringement (such as only $50 or $100 a song, not $80000).
"Penalties".. what a puritan idea. It's like we're too gutless to make this a crime and its clear that no actual damage has been done, so let's "punish" them by giving *more* money to the greedy bastards who want life+70 years for a work they couldn't even be bothered publishing 5 years after creation.
You only need to look at a story where for-profit infringement to take place to see the majority condemns their actions.
Again, you live in this fantasy where us bored minority of commenting users somehow represent the silent majority.
Wow, it's almost like they had some kind of political agenda that they were trying to push huh? Maybe they should have formed a political party.. the press coverage would have been just what they needed!
1. don't feed the trolls 2. why can't I be against one use of copyright but for another?
If I am "for" copyright, does that mean I have to like everything people do with it? If I am "against" copyright, does that mean I have to hate everything people do with it? Why can't I be against the selfish use of copyright to extract profit from the public but be for the selfless use of copyright create a protected public-domain-like body of work?
I'm a copyright abolitionist.. I think copyright should be completely scraped because I believe it does more harm than good, but that doesn't mean I think it does *only* harm.
The U.S. Supreme Court in 2002 ruled that "virtual child pornography," in which no children were actually harmed, is protected speech and does not constitute a crime.
"We see it all the time," Allen said. "It makes it harder for law enforcement. It makes it tougher for prosecutors."
Well yeah, prosecuting someone for something that isn't a crime would be "tougher".
It's a long standing complaint that governments keep information about contracts secret for the benefit of the contractors. Now you're complaining that a contractor didn't keep information about their contracts adequately secured? Are you stupid or something? The US taxpayers have a right to know the details of these contracts.. but they are denied that by commercial confidentiality concerns. If you want to cry a river for someone, think about the shareholders, but don't go blathering on about "secret government contracts" because they simply shouldn't exist.
Ya, thing is.. no-one really understands biological systems. There's just so many variables. So you might get a biological system that works just fine.. and then winter comes and it stops.
Slashdot Mirror
Because they can.
If a significant number of people quit their service and gave the feedback "there's just too many ads for a pay service" then maybe something would get done about it. But they don't.
Nah, I'll leave that as an exercise for the reader.
Thanks. That's probably the best reply comment on Slashdot I've read in a long time.
Sigh. Do you run a web browser? Does it display images?
How about "I want to connect to the Internet". Seriously, you must be so owned right now.
Or you could keep using XP or support an alternative.
Dude, I'm sure he gets letters from everyone. So if you really wanna make an impression, you need to give him a present. I think a chocolate gun would be a good present and you should run up to him really fast to give it to him.. because he's so busy.
If you allow teleporting from anywhere to anywhere it doesn't matter how big you make your world, because to everyone it will feel small.
In regards to why World of Warcraft uses the "flying on a griffin" form of "slow portals", that's cause they've read Bartle.
Umm.. why would you do that? eco-terrorist is already a word.. it means one who does terrorism in the name of the environment, not one who does terrorism *to* the environment. That's always been the use of the -terrorist prefix.. or did you think Islamic Terrorist meant they were terrorizing Islam?
Oh please, you don't actually think aiding dissidents in a foreign country is legal do ya? The only thing stopping Iran from demanding the extradition of these people is that they are anonymous.. except for Eric S. Raymond, and who wants him in their country?
And will continue to be "well underway" for the next 5 years with no-one having flown in it is my bet..
If we're really lucky, COTS will take over the ISS resupply and not only start selling seats to NASA, but to more spaceflight participants from the public. If that happens the ISS will likely survive beyond its 2016 use-by-date and NASA will be freed up to focus on the Moon and Mars.
The thing to remember, though, is that at some point Elon is going to send something to Mars. He's on the Mars Society board. It's the reason he started SpaceX in the first place.
Assuming all goes well :)
Do one thing, do it well.
You're right about SpaceX maybe being able to launch a capsule soon.. but not the Orion.
As for other rockets, no.. the ULA has specifically said it would take them 5.5 years to man rate a rocket.. and that's their estimate.. which, hopefully you know, is usually off by a factor of 3.
The X-Prize was designed to encourage the creation of a vehicle that would demonstrate the feasibility of a new market. It was backed up with a whole lot of market research which showed that people would happily sign up for a flight on such a vehicle. The anticipated business plan that it was trying to encourage was:
1. Build a vehicle that is very reusable and can put passengers into space.
2. Win the prize and get the PR.
3. Take bookings and reservation fees to fund the next flight.
4. Fly the first passengers in your winning vehicle.
5. Repeat 3, 4 until Profit!!
Unfortunately they didn't anticipate that some big personality like Burt Rutan would come along and do:
1. Convince an investor to invest *twice* the price to build a vehicle.
2. Win the prize and get the PR.
3. Use the PR to get more venture capital.
4. Took bookings and reservation fees for a new vehicle that hasn't even been built yet.
5. Never fly the winning vehicle again.. hang it in the Smithsonian like a freakin' monument or something.
6. Watch your schedule slip, try to catch up by cutting corners, have a fatal accident.
7. Announce that your vehicle will be delayed still more as you work on making it a "platform" for doing shit that wasn't in the original spec (can you say space shuttle?)
8. Demonstrate a fly over of your carrier aircraft, after having to delay the fly over due to malfunctions.
9. ?????? We're still waiting.
10. Profit?
I'm reading this thing so let me chime in with my annoyances as I read it.
Instead, we should stretch out the six remaining shuttle flights to 2015--one per year. Sure, that will cost money, but we can more than make up for it by canceling the troubled Ares I. In its place, we should use the old reliable Delta IV Heavy or the Atlas V satellite launchers, upgraded for human flight. (It won't take much.)
Sigh. I expect better from Buzz Aldrin - he's Buzz Freakin' Aldrin! What it "will take" is 6 years and the time it takes to build and gift new launch facilities to ULA. And that's their estimate. It will likely take longer. SpaceX says they can do it faster, but it's still not an Ares I class vehicle we're talking about here.
NASA should also step up its Commercial Orbital Transportation Services program to subsidize private rockets like the SpaceX Falcon 9, which could make its first flight any time now. SpaceX is also developing the Dragon capsule to fly seven astronauts to the space station.
Yah, more money for SpaceX.. I humbly agree with Mr Aldrin. However, even if SpaceX's COTS D capability was available tomorrow it would not dejustify the Ares I. They're two different launch vehicles with two different capabilities.
In the short term, some combination of an extended shuttle schedule and a new Orion/Delta, Orion/Atlas or Dragon/Falcon would fill the gap and give us the kind of continuity and flexibility we had during the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo programs. In the meantime, we need to develop new strategies, new launch vehicles and new spacecraft for the years beyond 2015 to bring us to the threshold of Mars.
Orion isn't ready and won't be ready for 6 years. Whining about the 5 year gap is not going to change that. Anyway, I can see that Mr Aldrin is now setting us up for the "love the Mars" speech.. so let me just say the ESAS specifically addressed the support needed for mating with a future Mars Transfer Vehicle and that is being studied right now.
The key to my medium-term plan is simple: Scrap our go-it-alone lunar program and let international partners--China, Europe, Russia, India, Japan--do the lion's share of the planning, technical development and funding. The U.S. would participate, and we would provide the technological leadership.
Wow, you actually want to lunar mission based on the International Space Station model?
To encourage more partners for both the lunar program and the space station, we should develop a manned spacecraft that other countries could afford to buy or lease.
Uh huh. So you're saying that other countries are interested in paying the small fortune the US spends to launch the shuttle? Or are you saying that if we just tried a little harder we could make the shuttle cheap and affordable? Aldrin, you're not this naive.
My alternative plan is simple math: Ares 3+3 is better than Ares 1+5. In other words, two medium-size Ares 3s would be a more efficient way to launch crew and cargo than a small crew-only Ares I and a huge cargo-only Ares V. NASA would require just one much less expensive rocket program.
Sigh, this again. Read the ESAS.. is that too much to ask?
If no commercial or mineral exploitation pans out, perhaps a few wealthy space tourists will pay $100 million for a lunar flyby.
Like they're lining up for the Soyuz flyby that is available right now?
To reach Mars, we should use comets, asteroids and Mars's moon Phobos as intermediate destinations. No giant leaps this time. More like a hop, skip and a jump.
News Flash: Buzz Aldrin doesn't understand delta-v.
For these long-duration missions, we need an entirely new spacecraft that I call the Exploration Module, or XM. Unlike the Orion capsule, which is designed for short flights around the Earth and to the moon..
Umm.. no. It's designed for lifting the crew to the station, or to an ERS/LSAM or to a mars transfer vehicle. Again, it's right there in the ESAS.
It's one thing to be naive, it's another to be misinformed. TPB was funded by the TPP to go to trial.
Um, most /.ers
You've spoken to all of them have you? I remember seeing stats that barely 1% of us even comment, let alone express their opinion on copyright laws.
would be for a 10 year copyright
Which will grow 10 years every 10 years, retroactively.
with mandatory registration
That will be eliminated the first time someone claims they "forgot" to register, like it was back when we had mandatory registration.
decriminalization of personal file sharing
Woah! When did personal file sharing become criminalized? Shit, I better flush my burnt DVDs!!
and clauses that allow non-commercial use of a product if it is abandoned.
Why only non-commercial? The whole point of copyright is to financially encourage valuable activities that people would otherwise not do. If the original publisher no longer wants to publish the work and I think I can make some money publishing the work, then clearly there are people who want copies and are willing to pay for them, so why not encourage me to serve that need? Why reserve that right to someone who doesn't want it anymore?
Most /.ers
yeah, cause you know..
oppose criminalization of personal file sharing
I imagine a world where file sharing is illegal and actually enforced will be the end of personal computing.
long copyright such as the totally ridiculous life + 70 years
But.. but.. I did some work 20 years ago and my great grandchildren might have to get a job!!
the ability for things to be lost when they are abandoned
"lost" is the extreme.. how about just "rare". It's really quite sad that a book that has been in print only 5 years is so hard to get. These days I go to Amazon and click through the long list of secondhand book sellers (who, btw, the copyright owners would love to stamp out!) and eventually find one that will mail me the product for almost the same cost of new. It's a travesty.
and oppose unreasonable penalties for infringement (such as only $50 or $100 a song, not $80000).
"Penalties".. what a puritan idea. It's like we're too gutless to make this a crime and its clear that no actual damage has been done, so let's "punish" them by giving *more* money to the greedy bastards who want life+70 years for a work they couldn't even be bothered publishing 5 years after creation.
You only need to look at a story where for-profit infringement to take place to see the majority condemns their actions.
Again, you live in this fantasy where us bored minority of commenting users somehow represent the silent majority.
Wow, it's almost like they had some kind of political agenda that they were trying to push huh? Maybe they should have formed a political party.. the press coverage would have been just what they needed!
[/sarcasm]
Oh, you actually replied to that troll..
1. don't feed the trolls
2. why can't I be against one use of copyright but for another?
If I am "for" copyright, does that mean I have to like everything people do with it? If I am "against" copyright, does that mean I have to hate everything people do with it? Why can't I be against the selfish use of copyright to extract profit from the public but be for the selfless use of copyright create a protected public-domain-like body of work?
I'm a copyright abolitionist.. I think copyright should be completely scraped because I believe it does more harm than good, but that doesn't mean I think it does *only* harm.
heh, it was illegal when they went to trial, yes, because they made the laws to make it illegal so they could take them to trial.
The U.S. Supreme Court in 2002 ruled that "virtual child pornography," in which no children were actually harmed, is protected speech and does not constitute a crime.
"We see it all the time," Allen said. "It makes it harder for law enforcement. It makes it tougher for prosecutors."
Well yeah, prosecuting someone for something that isn't a crime would be "tougher".
It's a long standing complaint that governments keep information about contracts secret for the benefit of the contractors. Now you're complaining that a contractor didn't keep information about their contracts adequately secured? Are you stupid or something? The US taxpayers have a right to know the details of these contracts.. but they are denied that by commercial confidentiality concerns. If you want to cry a river for someone, think about the shareholders, but don't go blathering on about "secret government contracts" because they simply shouldn't exist.
woosh.
The conspiracy theorists say US spy satellites caused them earthquakes in China.
Yes, I'm sure that is what it would be used for. Also, how do you do this from space? we need to be able to do it from space..
Ya, thing is.. no-one really understands biological systems. There's just so many variables. So you might get a biological system that works just fine.. and then winter comes and it stops.