It's still a good point, no matter how much you swear. Why does the garbage have to be brought back down? Surely they should just dump it off the spacestation and let it fall into the atmosphere and burn up?
Bringing the waste back down in the shuttle is always a risk. What happens when the shuttle breaks up on reentry again and spreads two years worth of astronaut poo across hundreds of miles of people's houses?
Maybe instead of collecting the waste on the ISS they could just shit and piss out the window. There was a recent article about spacesuits which said that the human body is not damaged by vaccuum. This means there could be a small hole in the wall of the station, big enough for a cock or a turd, but not big enough for the air to fall out of the space station. Problem solved.
Why does irrelevent incomprehensible drivel like this get modded up whilst other interesting comments get modded down? What the hell is he talking about?
Tesco are crap. They don't sell much of any quality, anything they do sell is overpriced. The eggs are all stale, the milk is watery, the vegetables are already wilting when they're put on the shelves. The meat's dry and tasteless, and only a very limited selection of cuts.
The herbs are over-priced, the bread's stale, most of the aisles are made up of microwavable cardboard ready-meals rather than actual food. The fruit's imported, flavourless crap. The cooked meats are overpriced and dry. The cheeses are plastic.
Of course the drooling masses all turn up every week to fill their trollies with microchips, ice-cream and crisps, and all the butchers and greengrocers and markets actually selling local fresh ingredients go bust.
Of course it's their own fault. The butcher near my house closes before six o' clock. That's not acceptable in the 21st century. The only people who are going to go in there are pensioners and housewives. It isn't the 1950s anymore where the wife didn't work and had the time to trapse round shops all day. If people finish work at 5pm and the butchers/greengrocers are shut, they're not going to do any business.
What calculator are you using? That's 1.32kW. Although where do you get 22V from? The usual is 230, so that's 13.8kW. Going on $0.1 per kWh, that's $1.38 per hour, or $33.12 a day. Over a particularly cold week that's $231.84.
Worse than just plugging in an electric heater I think.
No, a luddite is someone who doesn't like technology for no particular reason. In this instance, it's not liking a technology because it's completely worthless. I'd put it on the same level as a segway.
Some friend you are. Tell us your real name so if we meet you in real life we know not to be friendly with you. Anyone who grasses his friend up to the police is no friend at all. You're the lowest of the low. You'd pick the side of a faceless corporation before your own friends.
Let me ask this: would you behave the same if your 'friend' was pirating MP3s or downloading TV programmes?
Another thing to do: If you find a receipt somewhere, take it into the shop, pick the same item off the shelf, then 'return' it via your receipt. Instant cash.
At some shops you don't even need the receipt. It's not really 'stealing', they voluntarily hand over the cash.
In fact, instead of blaming the supposed fraudsters, how about the shops instead look at their own security, these scams were probably known for years but they didn't look out for them, surely it's their own fault if they get ripped off? Yes, I'm using the hacking analogy.
Can we please stop talking about feet? Try metres like the rest of us in the 21st century.
First of all 80% isn't 90%. That's a difference of 100%. Therefore it would need TWICE as much fuel as you thought it would. Do you realise how big an error this is? Then you need to find a way to accelerate it to Mach 5 to get to the same point as the shuttle.
And then you need a balloon-held launch facility, that's an engineering mega-task in itself. And knowing that if for any reason the launch is delayed or there's an error, the craft simply drops out of the sky.
And you need a balloon which can take something the weight of the shuttle up to that sort of height, whilst still allowing it to take off. Any design ideas?
If everyone who chose not to vote had instead voted against Blair, he'd be out of power today.
The two million number is highly exaggerrated, and is still a small percentage of the population. And that's not including any foreigners who took part. Also the war on Iraq was necessary. I didn't see all those protestors offering alternative solutions.
It's just the 'I'm alright Jack' attitude, those protestors get to live in a democracy, live how they please, and go home to a house with food and running water at the end of the day, they can even protest and have free speech without being executed. The Iraqis couldn't do any of that, but then the protestors don't care about them, they just want to pretend to care about politics for a day.
How on earth will you protest against this anti-piracy legislation? Walk around London holding signs up saying 'piracy is OK' or 'we want free mp3s'? I doubt you'll get much support for that. Outside of the Slashdot reality distortion field, people realise that there is no right to piracy.
As for the original poster, save the scaremongering and the slippery-slope fallacy, you're not impressing anyone, although you'll get modded up because piracy is one of Slashdot's buttons, make a post supporting piracy and it's instant +5.
Since when did anyone have the freedom, or the right, to infringe copyrights? This new proposal is just tying up loose ends, it's not taking away anything you had before. Copyright infringement is wrong, it's illegal, has been for centuries, always will be. All the whining in the world won't make downloading illegal MP3s any more acceptable. I guess you'll just have to follow copyrights like normal, sane human beings, and realise that you're not allowed to break the law just because you're using a computer.
What is it unfair? If an operating system doesn't have drivers for my hardware, it's of no use to me. Whether it's the fault of the OS developers or the hardware manufacturers is irrelevent, it either works or it doesn't.
That assumes that intelligence and knowledge are mutually exclusive with exercise, confidence and forcefulness. But I suppose as long as you're a failure with women, it's easier to blame it on women being stupid and shallow than you're own inadequacies and undesirable traits.
So this definitely goes against the spirit of a Wiki
Not necessary. There's nothing in the definition of a 'wiki' (whoever came up with that word has a lot to answer for, worst name ever) that means it has to be 100% open to everyone in the world. There are plenty of these 'wikis' which are login-only for a select group of people.
An online encyclopedia is worthless if you never know whether a page has just been subtly vandalised by some spotty teenager with no life.
But I wonder what it will mean for people like me who post edits to maybe 4 or 5 articles a year, when we find an error?
Then perhaps there should be a system so anonymous visitors who aren't logged in can suggest a correction, then someone who's logged in can confirm it. This would stop non-logged in trolls dead in their tracks but allow legitimate corrections.
That goes for amazon reviews as well. Over there, even terrible books get great reviews. Great books get poor scores, because only 3 people reviewed it and one gave it a 1, but then some shitty book by JK Rowling or Dan Brown will 5/5 because of hundreds of positive reviews by raving fanboys who haven't read anything else in their life, other than the instructions on the cornflakes box.
Before you buy a DVD, try and a find it on imdb, that's one of the only places which has a semi-accurate rating system. I think this is because it gives scores more weight when they're from people who review a lot of films, so it cuts down on fanboys somewhat, or people who've only seen 2-3 films and so think average ones are great.
Why is it that complete idiots with no grasp on reality are always convinced they're right, even when they've been corrected?
[1] Burt Ratan (forgive me giving him an extra "t" the nazis on the spelling etc around here are getting out of hand)
You've STILL not got it right. It's RUTAN. Write that out twenty times until you get it right. Who the fuck can make two spelling mistakes in a five-letter name? And still get it wrong even when they've been shown the right spelling?
did have to deal with "reentry problems"
Yes, the same way if I throw a ball 10m in the air it has to deal with reentry problems. The spaceship one went to 100km. Low earth orbit is 350km. Spaceship one didn't get to orbit speed. Orbit speed at LEO is 17,000 mph. It's not even in the same league as an orbital spaceship. I don't know why you can't see the facts. It would need THIRTY TIMES MORE ENERGY to get to orbit than just to rise to 100km and drop back down like a stone like it did. It's like compairing a floating piece of wood to a steam ship.
If 'Rattan' dealt with the problem as you say he did, let's see him get a spaceship into proper orbit, then get it to the ground using his 'feather recovery'.
The issue of balloon launch of 78 tons which was about equal to a segment of the Space Station to 92,000 feet from an airfield cannot be dismissed. Using standard boosting tech at that altitute, one can use 1/10th of the propellant to achieve exactly the same orbit.
More lies. 28km altitude is nothing. Not even a tenth of the way. A balloon doesn't even give the craft any orbital speed. What makes you think that taking a space-station segment to 8% of the orbit height saves you 90% of the fuel? And there's still the tiny issue of accelerating the craft to 7.7km/s. That's just a mere 443 GJ for the heavier ISS modules. So much for saving 90% of the fuel.
Its basic physics you idiots and it isn't F=ma or similar its wind resistance you idiots who think I don't know what I am talking about. Launches use about 90% of their energy to push air out of the way to get to orbit.
I find that very hard to believe. Especially considering the giant list of lies you've put onto this messageboard. Obviously NASA don't know as much as random Internet trolls.
I have been very much of a witness of a lot of things and in contact with a lot of things that some of you out there just have never seen. Yes I know a lot from this! A lot of events and situations you have never heard about. I was there!
Care to elaborate on this? Oh of course not, you're just a troll.
This isn't sucking up to programmer egos. It sucks up to *good* programmer egos.
How many programmers don't think they're good programmers? I'm betting that everyone here thinks they're in the 'good programmer' category, so there's going to be no dissent on this article. Of course most people here are probably terrible programemrs.
No civilian craft has ever got into orbit. The x-prize thing merely flew into the air and dropped back down again. It may have just reached some arbitrary border of 'space', but it's barely closer to space than a concorde. And look what happened to that.
The spaceship one can only fit one person in also.
Well, aren't you so great. Any reason we need to hear you brag about how you're in the 1% with a great job, and how you're so happy and so much better than the rest of us.
Wrong line of work? The only wrong line of work is one which doesn't pay. Anything else is the right line of work. I don't like being a cog in the machine for 8 hours a day, but rather that than in the dole queue.
I don't understand people who refuse to socialize with co-workers. I can understand not wanting to talk shop, but I have had the pleasure to work with some great people that I enjoy seeing at and outside of work.
That's alright for you, what about the rest of us who work in places populated nearly entirely with complete cunts? I don't want to socialise with them when I'm in work, let alone any other time. It would be like being at work again. Where exactly do you work where there are people there actually worth talking to?
A man who's work is both his vocation and his advocation is truly blessed.
What the hell does that mean? I put powder in bags for a living, I don't think I'm blessed. And no it's not cocaine.
That's OK for you, you had another job to go to. Most of us don't, we're lucky to have a job at all. Quitting or getting sacked would mean having the house reposessed and being homeless, and from then on no chance of ever getting another job, or anywhere to live.
That's only Mach 4. I don't see jet fighers breaking up in the rain. Maybe when they get to an altitude where there is rain, they should have slowed down to a speed where they don't get destroyed by small droplets of water.
Slashdot Mirror
It's still a good point, no matter how much you swear. Why does the garbage have to be brought back down? Surely they should just dump it off the spacestation and let it fall into the atmosphere and burn up?
Bringing the waste back down in the shuttle is always a risk. What happens when the shuttle breaks up on reentry again and spreads two years worth of astronaut poo across hundreds of miles of people's houses?
Maybe instead of collecting the waste on the ISS they could just shit and piss out the window. There was a recent article about spacesuits which said that the human body is not damaged by vaccuum. This means there could be a small hole in the wall of the station, big enough for a cock or a turd, but not big enough for the air to fall out of the space station. Problem solved.
Why does irrelevent incomprehensible drivel like this get modded up whilst other interesting comments get modded down? What the hell is he talking about?
Tesco are crap. They don't sell much of any quality, anything they do sell is overpriced. The eggs are all stale, the milk is watery, the vegetables are already wilting when they're put on the shelves. The meat's dry and tasteless, and only a very limited selection of cuts.
The herbs are over-priced, the bread's stale, most of the aisles are made up of microwavable cardboard ready-meals rather than actual food. The fruit's imported, flavourless crap. The cooked meats are overpriced and dry. The cheeses are plastic.
Of course the drooling masses all turn up every week to fill their trollies with microchips, ice-cream and crisps, and all the butchers and greengrocers and markets actually selling local fresh ingredients go bust.
Of course it's their own fault. The butcher near my house closes before six o' clock. That's not acceptable in the 21st century. The only people who are going to go in there are pensioners and housewives. It isn't the 1950s anymore where the wife didn't work and had the time to trapse round shops all day. If people finish work at 5pm and the butchers/greengrocers are shut, they're not going to do any business.
What calculator are you using? That's 1.32kW. Although where do you get 22V from? The usual is 230, so that's 13.8kW. Going on $0.1 per kWh, that's $1.38 per hour, or $33.12 a day. Over a particularly cold week that's $231.84.
Worse than just plugging in an electric heater I think.
Can someone please delete the above comment? It makes it seem that this site is populated by idiots.
No, a luddite is someone who doesn't like technology for no particular reason. In this instance, it's not liking a technology because it's completely worthless. I'd put it on the same level as a segway.
Some friend you are. Tell us your real name so if we meet you in real life we know not to be friendly with you. Anyone who grasses his friend up to the police is no friend at all. You're the lowest of the low. You'd pick the side of a faceless corporation before your own friends.
Let me ask this: would you behave the same if your 'friend' was pirating MP3s or downloading TV programmes?
Another thing to do: If you find a receipt somewhere, take it into the shop, pick the same item off the shelf, then 'return' it via your receipt. Instant cash.
At some shops you don't even need the receipt. It's not really 'stealing', they voluntarily hand over the cash.
In fact, instead of blaming the supposed fraudsters, how about the shops instead look at their own security, these scams were probably known for years but they didn't look out for them, surely it's their own fault if they get ripped off? Yes, I'm using the hacking analogy.
Do you mean like if an author is about to write a book, he might think "Oh hang on, there are troops still in Iraq, I won't bother writing."????
Would there have been no reality TV without 11/9? I don't know what the hell you're talking about.
Can we please stop talking about feet? Try metres like the rest of us in the 21st century.
First of all 80% isn't 90%. That's a difference of 100%. Therefore it would need TWICE as much fuel as you thought it would. Do you realise how big an error this is? Then you need to find a way to accelerate it to Mach 5 to get to the same point as the shuttle.
And then you need a balloon-held launch facility, that's an engineering mega-task in itself. And knowing that if for any reason the launch is delayed or there's an error, the craft simply drops out of the sky.
And you need a balloon which can take something the weight of the shuttle up to that sort of height, whilst still allowing it to take off. Any design ideas?
Nope not a troll you are!
English?
If everyone who chose not to vote had instead voted against Blair, he'd be out of power today.
The two million number is highly exaggerrated, and is still a small percentage of the population. And that's not including any foreigners who took part. Also the war on Iraq was necessary. I didn't see all those protestors offering alternative solutions.
It's just the 'I'm alright Jack' attitude, those protestors get to live in a democracy, live how they please, and go home to a house with food and running water at the end of the day, they can even protest and have free speech without being executed. The Iraqis couldn't do any of that, but then the protestors don't care about them, they just want to pretend to care about politics for a day.
How on earth will you protest against this anti-piracy legislation? Walk around London holding signs up saying 'piracy is OK' or 'we want free mp3s'? I doubt you'll get much support for that. Outside of the Slashdot reality distortion field, people realise that there is no right to piracy.
As for the original poster, save the scaremongering and the slippery-slope fallacy, you're not impressing anyone, although you'll get modded up because piracy is one of Slashdot's buttons, make a post supporting piracy and it's instant +5.
Since when did anyone have the freedom, or the right, to infringe copyrights? This new proposal is just tying up loose ends, it's not taking away anything you had before. Copyright infringement is wrong, it's illegal, has been for centuries, always will be. All the whining in the world won't make downloading illegal MP3s any more acceptable. I guess you'll just have to follow copyrights like normal, sane human beings, and realise that you're not allowed to break the law just because you're using a computer.
What is it unfair? If an operating system doesn't have drivers for my hardware, it's of no use to me. Whether it's the fault of the OS developers or the hardware manufacturers is irrelevent, it either works or it doesn't.
Or more realistically, a 15 year reunion where the nerds have gotten fat and are working for 20k in some obscure lab begging for grants.
That assumes that intelligence and knowledge are mutually exclusive with exercise, confidence and forcefulness. But I suppose as long as you're a failure with women, it's easier to blame it on women being stupid and shallow than you're own inadequacies and undesirable traits.
So this definitely goes against the spirit of a Wiki
Not necessary. There's nothing in the definition of a 'wiki' (whoever came up with that word has a lot to answer for, worst name ever) that means it has to be 100% open to everyone in the world. There are plenty of these 'wikis' which are login-only for a select group of people.
An online encyclopedia is worthless if you never know whether a page has just been subtly vandalised by some spotty teenager with no life.
But I wonder what it will mean for people like me who post edits to maybe 4 or 5 articles a year, when we find an error?
Then perhaps there should be a system so anonymous visitors who aren't logged in can suggest a correction, then someone who's logged in can confirm it. This would stop non-logged in trolls dead in their tracks but allow legitimate corrections.
That goes for amazon reviews as well. Over there, even terrible books get great reviews. Great books get poor scores, because only 3 people reviewed it and one gave it a 1, but then some shitty book by JK Rowling or Dan Brown will 5/5 because of hundreds of positive reviews by raving fanboys who haven't read anything else in their life, other than the instructions on the cornflakes box.
Before you buy a DVD, try and a find it on imdb, that's one of the only places which has a semi-accurate rating system. I think this is because it gives scores more weight when they're from people who review a lot of films, so it cuts down on fanboys somewhat, or people who've only seen 2-3 films and so think average ones are great.
Why is it that complete idiots with no grasp on reality are always convinced they're right, even when they've been corrected?
[1] Burt Ratan (forgive me giving him an extra "t" the nazis on the spelling etc around here are getting out of hand)
You've STILL not got it right. It's RUTAN. Write that out twenty times until you get it right. Who the fuck can make two spelling mistakes in a five-letter name? And still get it wrong even when they've been shown the right spelling?
did have to deal with "reentry problems"
Yes, the same way if I throw a ball 10m in the air it has to deal with reentry problems. The spaceship one went to 100km. Low earth orbit is 350km. Spaceship one didn't get to orbit speed. Orbit speed at LEO is 17,000 mph. It's not even in the same league as an orbital spaceship. I don't know why you can't see the facts. It would need THIRTY TIMES MORE ENERGY to get to orbit than just to rise to 100km and drop back down like a stone like it did. It's like compairing a floating piece of wood to a steam ship.
If 'Rattan' dealt with the problem as you say he did, let's see him get a spaceship into proper orbit, then get it to the ground using his 'feather recovery'.
The issue of balloon launch of 78 tons which was about equal to a segment of the Space Station to 92,000 feet from an airfield cannot be dismissed. Using standard boosting tech at that altitute, one can use 1/10th of the propellant to achieve exactly the same orbit.
More lies. 28km altitude is nothing. Not even a tenth of the way. A balloon doesn't even give the craft any orbital speed. What makes you think that taking a space-station segment to 8% of the orbit height saves you 90% of the fuel? And there's still the tiny issue of accelerating the craft to 7.7km/s. That's just a mere 443 GJ for the heavier ISS modules. So much for saving 90% of the fuel.
Its basic physics you idiots and it isn't F=ma or similar its wind resistance you idiots who think I don't know what I am talking about. Launches use about 90% of their energy to push air out of the way to get to orbit.
I find that very hard to believe. Especially considering the giant list of lies you've put onto this messageboard. Obviously NASA don't know as much as random Internet trolls.
I have been very much of a witness of a lot of things and in contact with a lot of things that some of you out there just have never seen. Yes I know a lot from this! A lot of events and situations you have never heard about. I was there!
Care to elaborate on this? Oh of course not, you're just a troll.
This isn't sucking up to programmer egos. It sucks up to *good* programmer egos.
How many programmers don't think they're good programmers? I'm betting that everyone here thinks they're in the 'good programmer' category, so there's going to be no dissent on this article. Of course most people here are probably terrible programemrs.
No civilian craft has ever got into orbit. The x-prize thing merely flew into the air and dropped back down again. It may have just reached some arbitrary border of 'space', but it's barely closer to space than a concorde. And look what happened to that.
The spaceship one can only fit one person in also.
Well, aren't you so great. Any reason we need to hear you brag about how you're in the 1% with a great job, and how you're so happy and so much better than the rest of us.
Wrong line of work? The only wrong line of work is one which doesn't pay. Anything else is the right line of work. I don't like being a cog in the machine for 8 hours a day, but rather that than in the dole queue.
I don't understand people who refuse to socialize with co-workers. I can understand not wanting to talk shop, but I have had the pleasure to work with some great people that I enjoy seeing at and outside of work.
That's alright for you, what about the rest of us who work in places populated nearly entirely with complete cunts? I don't want to socialise with them when I'm in work, let alone any other time. It would be like being at work again. Where exactly do you work where there are people there actually worth talking to?
A man who's work is both his vocation and his advocation is truly blessed.
What the hell does that mean? I put powder in bags for a living, I don't think I'm blessed. And no it's not cocaine.
That's OK for you, you had another job to go to. Most of us don't, we're lucky to have a job at all. Quitting or getting sacked would mean having the house reposessed and being homeless, and from then on no chance of ever getting another job, or anywhere to live.
That's only Mach 4. I don't see jet fighers breaking up in the rain. Maybe when they get to an altitude where there is rain, they should have slowed down to a speed where they don't get destroyed by small droplets of water.