No, the expensive instruments were other countries. The backbone was India's (power system, comm link, etc). Now, as to losing communication with the sat, give it time. It is possible that it will be regained. It could be a simple issue, that will be solved.
I wish that ppl would stop trying to assign DOLLAR figures to China, Indian, or any other country that ties their money to a certain money. Saying that it cost 75 million is plain wrong (most estimates in India show it to be in the $90-95 million). Right now, the Rupee is FORCED by India to trade at 48 rupee to a dollar. According to most economist, it should be around half of that, or possibly less (more difficult to pin this down, than say the Chinese games with Yuans). As such, the missions is around $150-200 million. But, that is STILL not the full truth. The majority of expensive instruments on the sat are from different countries. Basically, the LAUNCH is what costs about $100-150 million, with the sat being less than $50 million. And at a 100 million per launch, they are on par with America, Russia, and EU.
I am not trying to belittle their efforts. In fact, far from it. I applaud them and hope that we will bring them into the ISS down the road. BUT, I still prefer that ppl are honest about what is going on.
HP will keep this and keep it in maintenance mode. The simple fact is, that OS's normally are unprofitable UNTIL they go into maintenance. The obvious exception is the monster monopoly.
Look, numerous studies have been done and they show over and over that Solar can NOT provide everything. Nor, can wind and solar.
A serious question to you. I am a backer of AE, but I look at the simple fact that even if we built all the wind as fast we could AND all the solar PV that we could, it would still take us over a decade to make a real dent. So, it is PLAINLY OBVIOUS that this can NOT be the only solution. Yet, ppl like yourself REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE that. Why? Seriously, why? Also, Solar PV is THE MOST EXPENSIVE solution that we can do at this time. In fact, it will remain that way for no less than 5 years, and more likely for another decade. So, why are you pushing this?
Why not push Solar Thermal, Geo-thermal, and more nukes? Solar Thermal AND geo-thermal are all capable of generating electricity at a price equal or lower than Natural Gas TODAY. And both are about to go below Coal prices. Yet, ppl like yourself do not push it.
In addition, if you are concerned about CO2 and/or oil imports, then you HAVE to back Nukes as well as fast development of Algae for bio-fuels. The reason for Algae is that it allows us to replace oil for the majority of its use. And there are PLENTY of places that oil is required. For starters, Aviation. But, why do ppl like you oppose all these things and just push the WORST alternative. In fact, at this moment, the IMPOSSIBLE address.
Why not accept that we need far more than s
While you need one to relay lots of info to earth, not all the sats have to be heavy carriers; Think of little home routers vs the large routers that are used at ISPs. What is needed INITIALLY is a simple network that can send moderate (ok small) amounts of data that would allow several other sats to send information via these relays. Something like marscom would make sense, combined with ONE TDRSS like system located at earth-moon L1. Keep in mind that since we have so few sats there and for relatively short time, we simply need the ability to talk to them when they are on backside. Later, when more sats are up there, then it would make sense to put up large high bandwidth ones.
And you work for who? FSF does NOT just promote free software. They promote freedom (really democracy). They are working to preserve our right to vote for the software that we want. Part of that is to speak out against totalitarianism, which is what MS is.
I was thinking about that over the last few days (saw this monday). It seems to me that we really need to get the microsats going just for communication. It would be useful to get a network going around the moon and perhaps around mars. If we just do the moon first, we can use the experience for Mars. Yeah, I know. It was planned for Mars, but W's admin killed it. But the microsats could do this job NICELY for the moon. The same network could be used by Lunar prize.
I would rather that the "employees" stay up on the net. If somebody has their nose just to their labourous work and never gets the opportunity to learn what is going on, then we will not have educated workforce. Sadly, I am guessing that you really do not want that. But downloading MUSIC per se is NOT always stealing, nor is it always goofing off.
Actually, about 8-10 foot (2-5 meters) is how far you have to go. That is how far most geo-thermal heat pumps are located for horizontal set-ups. Depending on where you live, the temps will be around 50-60F (10-15C).
I am amazed that more of the cloud computers are not heading that way. Pretty easy way to lower the costs of HVAC.
Your idea is interesting, but why do you want to cap CO2 production without taxing it?
Cap it to stop growing production. Had we capped back in 1998, it would be easy to slowly back down. The more that we grow, the harder it will be down the road. And putting a tax on the trade only hurts our efforts to back it down. It will increase OUR costs with nothing gained. Instead, simply require that the permits decline in amount of CO2 production. If a company goes over the limit, then give them time to buy permits from others, require that they cut back, or tax them heavily.
Yeah, the tax on the goods is to back down EVERYBODIES CO2. ANd not just coal plants, but all of our fossil fuel usage. Having America cut back say 10-20 coal plants a year does no good if India is adding those in and China is LITERALLY adding 1-2 new coal plants a year for the next decade (and that is their plan), along with other extra emissions. It also rewards those nations that have already worked to lower their emissions, such as most of the EU, Canada, Japan, etc.
BTW, it is amazing to me that most ppl do not realize why oil and coal equipment companies support this bill. They will simply move elsewhere. OTH, if we do the carbon tax on ALL GOODS, then all nations will be forced to cut. That means that coal equipment companies will be done within 10-15 year. Oil companies will be similar, except that oil will still be required for other items (plastics, etc). But it will still be much much less.
And oil companies stand to lose billions if Cap and Trade is passed. But, that's irrelevant. What is relevant is whether Cap and Trade, in HR2454, actually has an effect on global warming.
I agree with nearly all that you said, but have to say that I believe that this bill is DEAD WRONG (and your support of it). I believe that this bill will have the OPPOSITE effect on CO2 emissions. The reason is simple. Once we cap our emissions and do a tax ONLY on our emissions, it will raise the price of energy here. In addition, if we stop building coal plants, that will simply encourage GE and other coal plant companies to get other nations to use them. How? Because all of the other nations will want to pick up our production. They already have lower pay, China has their money tied to ours (regardless of how much money of ours they have), and many third world countries have very little in terms of pollution control. Basically, this bill will actually encourage nations like BRIC to pollute more and at a faster rate. China is smaller than America, has lower GDP and yet, has more CO2 than America (and is growing it fastest). I am trying hard to see my senators to get them to vote against the bill. Instead, I would like a TRUE CAP and TAX bill. We should do a cap, and allow the companies to trade declining amount permits without any taxes on these except when traded. More importantly, we need to put a tax on ALL GOODS based on the CO2 from where it was produced (that includes all the major components) and the CO2 to transport it. That means that goods produced in France will have a lower tax except for the CO2 to get it here. The important part of this is to start it low and increase it EVERY SO often. Likewise, the tax paid would then be based on a KNOWN FORMULA. Not one that changes, or one that is hidden (say the chinese basket of money).
Seriously, things COULD turn nasty and then this goes to court. He is most likely trying to be nice, but if you are doing side work and want the right to keep that separate, then you should do so. I do recommend that you keep HIS work on a separate disk. He may also insist that you do work only under his licenses, etc (protect himself). If so, consider xen, or vmware and run a virtual system for HIS stuff.
If the west REALLY wants to limit and shrink CO2 emissions (as well as other pollutants), then there is a VERY simple way to do this. CO2 unlike other emissions is NOT single point. Coal plants are not the only source of these. But to hit these is difficult. Worse, trying to get all nations on board is also difficult. The easy answer to this is have a tax at point of purchase (or higher up stream) that is applied to ALL GOODS and is based on the amount of CO2 (and hopefully pollutants) FROM THE AREA THAT IT COMES FROM. That way, every nation has a strong incentive to drop their emissions FAST. Right now, many countries of EU has done more than America and certainly much more than China to drop their total CO2. This tax would also help those nation to keep on dropping their emissions, since we all know that it costs more to have this. At this time, kyoto has encouraged other nations to pollute more to lower their energy costs and then chase after western goods. In fact, my belief is that the Obama bill will cut back our emissions, but will instead, encourage lots more cheap energy (read coal) production in other nations that want to move their production to their nation. The dem bill is well intentioned, BUT is a disaster in the making.
First, America was hit by OBL. We are in Afghanistan BECAUSE of that. NO OTHER REASON. Likewise, you seem to have forgotten that we WERE in iraq originally because of Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. That was the initial reason for our, AND NATO, being in the middle east. Now, I will NOT stick up for W WRT his invasion of Iraq as there was overwhelming evidence that Iraq did not have WMD. Obviously, W pushed a lot of lies by our gov, and congress went along with it. My guess is that it was for the oil and nothing else. BUT, to attribute both wars to America is total BS and ignores facts and history.
Now, lets address your garbage about Global warming being ALL OF AMERICA's fault. So many like to push this concept that we should tie CO2 emissions to the number of ppl. That is a total crock and HORRIBLE logic. For starters, population numbers change. Worse, many of the countries have not done a thing about population control. As such, it will allow countries to continue to emit by simply increasing their population. Some number crunching that I did that I will be putting in wiki later (once the 2009 CO2 info is out) was emissions / the land mass. What I found is that America was in the middle of emissions. Instead, many small third world nations as well as most of EU were some of the WORST polluters. Of course that was tied to size only. Instead, CO2 emissions should propably be tied to the size of their nation as well as percentage of global GDP that is exported. With either of these in place, America is certainly not number 1, though we still need to increase efficiencies. Of course, that is what Obama is doing by pushing Cash for Clunkers and now, money for washers.
Also, China's growth is NOT EQUIVILENT to putting up a coal plant per week. They are putting up TWO NEW COAL planets PER WEEK AND their car growth is BOOMING. Basically, China is putting up 4-6 NEW COAL PLANTS PER WEEK. Even now, their yearly CO2 emissions is the largest on the planet. If they continue this course for simply one more decade, they will put out more CO2 than America AND EUROPE has in total. If they stay with current numbers and STOP ALL GROWTH RIGHT NOW, they will surpass America's AND EUROPES total CO2 emission within 2 decades.
Likewise, China has already surpassed America or Europe in many other pollutants is well on its way to surpassing the ACCUMULATED TOTAL OF THE ENTIRE REST OF THE WEST. For example, China's emissions of Mercury now exceeds all that EU OR America HAS PUT OUT. In about another 2 years, they will exceed all that EU AND America has done over time. Likewise, their Sulfur emissions currently outstrip BOTH EU and America. Though to be honest, if they stopped, it is likely that the world might be in trouble. That serves to reflect a lot of light. But the acidification is not to good either.
For you to place the full blame on America makes you as foolish as the far right and those that oppose stopping GW.
That is actually not conservatives. That is neo-cons and far right baptists that push that garbage (roughly reagan and W). These are the same ppl that dropped taxes under reagan and pushed massive deficits. And that was for ALL EIGHT YEARS. What was amazing is that Carter had already put in place the solutions by de-regulating the airlines and oil/gas, as well as starting to tighten the money supply by appointing volker. True conservatives KNOW that Obama is American, and that Climate change is a reality. Though a number of them do believe to some degree in creationism.
Here, you have to be able to bend and twist logic and out and out lie about it. While some scientists are liars, the majority of trial lawyers are liars.
that even if the judge is honest and say that yes, man is warming the planet, then business will STILL appeal and if won all the way through, they will still deny that man can make an impact. And it the "trial" is lost, then what? Absolutely nothing.
is that we have given LOADS more money to Russia to keep them going and that is not considered part of those modules. However, I have to believe that getting all the countries of the ISS to go to the moon AND mars is in everybodies best interest. We need to jointly develop space and learn to work closer together. It is the same spirit that NATO did for the west.
If MS is still threatened (which they are), then money will flow to SCO. Likewise, if McNealy is working for Oracle, then Oracle will quietly fund it, and then deny it.
Dick Shelby is very nervous about NASA going to private contractors. He wants to make certain that they only have a VERY little bit of money. RIght now, Shelby's area is up for all sorts of NASA money in his area. So, from his POV, if we use Russia AND China for transportation to the ISS, then we do not need private ventures. In addition, Russia is charging us DOUBLE what they charge private ppl (25 vs 57). China is expected to charge about the same. And yes, it will mean a transfer of tech since China would then be on the ISS.
OTH, if we use that money for private ventures and keep shuttle going until ONE company is aloft with cargo rated (be is ULA or SpaceX, etc), then it will costs about the same, have greater capacity to lift and more importantly, we will see costs drop down the road. If we want to increase what NASA can do, then we must lower the costs of getting to space. SpaceX is actually lower costs than is Russia OR china (unless they subsidize it, which China already does by fixed money and trade barriers).
Oh dick shelby would rather sell out America than lose the money to his area. A neo-con through and through.
Seriously, they know each other. Cohen goes after this, THEN drops the suite. BUT, Porter goes after Google. I wonder if cohen will end up with millions after this? Sounds complicated, but it makes more sense then does the actions that have occurred so far.
pilots in the 60 who spoke quietly about these. Of course, scientists said that no such thing exists and as such, most pilots kept real quiet about it. Only at wild 60's parties would I hear some of these guys talking about it.
Not if it is required. As I said earlier, this needs to be FAIR and can not compromise our national security. The condition of China and India certainly is not a fair economic situation and China would absolutely be a compromise of national security.
Do you have any clue about how funny that is?
on
NASA May Outsource
·
· Score: 1
Nearly ALL of the small startups have an astronaut on-board that is pushing the company. More importantly, they are all saying that this is the way that it should go. Simpler systems; less costs; more launches leading to lower price and improved safety. IF NASA also pushes for bigelow in creating a private location, this will allow a LOT more launches to take place, which will only improve the costs for all.
Slashdot Mirror
No, the expensive instruments were other countries. The backbone was India's (power system, comm link, etc). Now, as to losing communication with the sat, give it time. It is possible that it will be regained. It could be a simple issue, that will be solved.
I wish that ppl would stop trying to assign DOLLAR figures to China, Indian, or any other country that ties their money to a certain money. Saying that it cost 75 million is plain wrong (most estimates in India show it to be in the $90-95 million). Right now, the Rupee is FORCED by India to trade at 48 rupee to a dollar. According to most economist, it should be around half of that, or possibly less (more difficult to pin this down, than say the Chinese games with Yuans). As such, the missions is around $150-200 million. But, that is STILL not the full truth. The majority of expensive instruments on the sat are from different countries. Basically, the LAUNCH is what costs about $100-150 million, with the sat being less than $50 million. And at a 100 million per launch, they are on par with America, Russia, and EU.
I am not trying to belittle their efforts. In fact, far from it. I applaud them and hope that we will bring them into the ISS down the road. BUT, I still prefer that ppl are honest about what is going on.
HP will keep this and keep it in maintenance mode. The simple fact is, that OS's normally are unprofitable UNTIL they go into maintenance. The obvious exception is the monster monopoly.
I wonder if the others are dems? Perhaps it is time to check the keys themselves and see what is on them
Look, numerous studies have been done and they show over and over that Solar can NOT provide everything. Nor, can wind and solar.
A serious question to you. I am a backer of AE, but I look at the simple fact that even if we built all the wind as fast we could AND all the solar PV that we could, it would still take us over a decade to make a real dent. So, it is PLAINLY OBVIOUS that this can NOT be the only solution. Yet, ppl like yourself REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE that. Why? Seriously, why? Also, Solar PV is THE MOST EXPENSIVE solution that we can do at this time. In fact, it will remain that way for no less than 5 years, and more likely for another decade. So, why are you pushing this?
Why not push Solar Thermal, Geo-thermal, and more nukes? Solar Thermal AND geo-thermal are all capable of generating electricity at a price equal or lower than Natural Gas TODAY. And both are about to go below Coal prices. Yet, ppl like yourself do not push it.
In addition, if you are concerned about CO2 and/or oil imports, then you HAVE to back Nukes as well as fast development of Algae for bio-fuels. The reason for Algae is that it allows us to replace oil for the majority of its use. And there are PLENTY of places that oil is required. For starters, Aviation. But, why do ppl like you oppose all these things and just push the WORST alternative. In fact, at this moment, the IMPOSSIBLE address. Why not accept that we need far more than s
While you need one to relay lots of info to earth, not all the sats have to be heavy carriers; Think of little home routers vs the large routers that are used at ISPs. What is needed INITIALLY is a simple network that can send moderate (ok small) amounts of data that would allow several other sats to send information via these relays. Something like marscom would make sense, combined with ONE TDRSS like system located at earth-moon L1. Keep in mind that since we have so few sats there and for relatively short time, we simply need the ability to talk to them when they are on backside. Later, when more sats are up there, then it would make sense to put up large high bandwidth ones.
And you work for who? FSF does NOT just promote free software. They promote freedom (really democracy). They are working to preserve our right to vote for the software that we want. Part of that is to speak out against totalitarianism, which is what MS is.
I was thinking about that over the last few days (saw this monday). It seems to me that we really need to get the microsats going just for communication. It would be useful to get a network going around the moon and perhaps around mars. If we just do the moon first, we can use the experience for Mars. Yeah, I know. It was planned for Mars, but W's admin killed it. But the microsats could do this job NICELY for the moon. The same network could be used by Lunar prize.
I would rather that the "employees" stay up on the net. If somebody has their nose just to their labourous work and never gets the opportunity to learn what is going on, then we will not have educated workforce. Sadly, I am guessing that you really do not want that. But downloading MUSIC per se is NOT always stealing, nor is it always goofing off.
Actually, about 8-10 foot (2-5 meters) is how far you have to go. That is how far most geo-thermal heat pumps are located for horizontal set-ups. Depending on where you live, the temps will be around 50-60F (10-15C).
I am amazed that more of the cloud computers are not heading that way. Pretty easy way to lower the costs of HVAC.
Your idea is interesting, but why do you want to cap CO2 production without taxing it?
Cap it to stop growing production. Had we capped back in 1998, it would be easy to slowly back down. The more that we grow, the harder it will be down the road. And putting a tax on the trade only hurts our efforts to back it down. It will increase OUR costs with nothing gained. Instead, simply require that the permits decline in amount of CO2 production. If a company goes over the limit, then give them time to buy permits from others, require that they cut back, or tax them heavily.
Yeah, the tax on the goods is to back down EVERYBODIES CO2. ANd not just coal plants, but all of our fossil fuel usage. Having America cut back say 10-20 coal plants a year does no good if India is adding those in and China is LITERALLY adding 1-2 new coal plants a year for the next decade (and that is their plan), along with other extra emissions. It also rewards those nations that have already worked to lower their emissions, such as most of the EU, Canada, Japan, etc.
BTW, it is amazing to me that most ppl do not realize why oil and coal equipment companies support this bill. They will simply move elsewhere. OTH, if we do the carbon tax on ALL GOODS, then all nations will be forced to cut. That means that coal equipment companies will be done within 10-15 year. Oil companies will be similar, except that oil will still be required for other items (plastics, etc). But it will still be much much less.
And oil companies stand to lose billions if Cap and Trade is passed. But, that's irrelevant. What is relevant is whether Cap and Trade, in HR2454, actually has an effect on global warming.
I agree with nearly all that you said, but have to say that I believe that this bill is DEAD WRONG (and your support of it). I believe that this bill will have the OPPOSITE effect on CO2 emissions. The reason is simple. Once we cap our emissions and do a tax ONLY on our emissions, it will raise the price of energy here. In addition, if we stop building coal plants, that will simply encourage GE and other coal plant companies to get other nations to use them. How? Because all of the other nations will want to pick up our production. They already have lower pay, China has their money tied to ours (regardless of how much money of ours they have), and many third world countries have very little in terms of pollution control. Basically, this bill will actually encourage nations like BRIC to pollute more and at a faster rate. China is smaller than America, has lower GDP and yet, has more CO2 than America (and is growing it fastest). I am trying hard to see my senators to get them to vote against the bill. Instead, I would like a TRUE CAP and TAX bill. We should do a cap, and allow the companies to trade declining amount permits without any taxes on these except when traded. More importantly, we need to put a tax on ALL GOODS based on the CO2 from where it was produced (that includes all the major components) and the CO2 to transport it. That means that goods produced in France will have a lower tax except for the CO2 to get it here. The important part of this is to start it low and increase it EVERY SO often. Likewise, the tax paid would then be based on a KNOWN FORMULA. Not one that changes, or one that is hidden (say the chinese basket of money).
Seriously, things COULD turn nasty and then this goes to court. He is most likely trying to be nice, but if you are doing side work and want the right to keep that separate, then you should do so. I do recommend that you keep HIS work on a separate disk. He may also insist that you do work only under his licenses, etc (protect himself). If so, consider xen, or vmware and run a virtual system for HIS stuff.
If the west REALLY wants to limit and shrink CO2 emissions (as well as other pollutants), then there is a VERY simple way to do this. CO2 unlike other emissions is NOT single point. Coal plants are not the only source of these. But to hit these is difficult. Worse, trying to get all nations on board is also difficult. The easy answer to this is have a tax at point of purchase (or higher up stream) that is applied to ALL GOODS and is based on the amount of CO2 (and hopefully pollutants) FROM THE AREA THAT IT COMES FROM. That way, every nation has a strong incentive to drop their emissions FAST. Right now, many countries of EU has done more than America and certainly much more than China to drop their total CO2. This tax would also help those nation to keep on dropping their emissions, since we all know that it costs more to have this. At this time, kyoto has encouraged other nations to pollute more to lower their energy costs and then chase after western goods. In fact, my belief is that the Obama bill will cut back our emissions, but will instead, encourage lots more cheap energy (read coal) production in other nations that want to move their production to their nation. The dem bill is well intentioned, BUT is a disaster in the making.
First, America was hit by OBL. We are in Afghanistan BECAUSE of that. NO OTHER REASON. Likewise, you seem to have forgotten that we WERE in iraq originally because of Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. That was the initial reason for our, AND NATO, being in the middle east. Now, I will NOT stick up for W WRT his invasion of Iraq as there was overwhelming evidence that Iraq did not have WMD. Obviously, W pushed a lot of lies by our gov, and congress went along with it. My guess is that it was for the oil and nothing else. BUT, to attribute both wars to America is total BS and ignores facts and history.
Now, lets address your garbage about Global warming being ALL OF AMERICA's fault. So many like to push this concept that we should tie CO2 emissions to the number of ppl. That is a total crock and HORRIBLE logic. For starters, population numbers change. Worse, many of the countries have not done a thing about population control. As such, it will allow countries to continue to emit by simply increasing their population. Some number crunching that I did that I will be putting in wiki later (once the 2009 CO2 info is out) was emissions / the land mass. What I found is that America was in the middle of emissions. Instead, many small third world nations as well as most of EU were some of the WORST polluters. Of course that was tied to size only. Instead, CO2 emissions should propably be tied to the size of their nation as well as percentage of global GDP that is exported. With either of these in place, America is certainly not number 1, though we still need to increase efficiencies. Of course, that is what Obama is doing by pushing Cash for Clunkers and now, money for washers.
Also, China's growth is NOT EQUIVILENT to putting up a coal plant per week. They are putting up TWO NEW COAL planets PER WEEK AND their car growth is BOOMING. Basically, China is putting up 4-6 NEW COAL PLANTS PER WEEK. Even now, their yearly CO2 emissions is the largest on the planet. If they continue this course for simply one more decade, they will put out more CO2 than America AND EUROPE has in total. If they stay with current numbers and STOP ALL GROWTH RIGHT NOW, they will surpass America's AND EUROPES total CO2 emission within 2 decades.
Likewise, China has already surpassed America or Europe in many other pollutants is well on its way to surpassing the ACCUMULATED TOTAL OF THE ENTIRE REST OF THE WEST. For example, China's emissions of Mercury now exceeds all that EU OR America HAS PUT OUT. In about another 2 years, they will exceed all that EU AND America has done over time. Likewise, their Sulfur emissions currently outstrip BOTH EU and America. Though to be honest, if they stopped, it is likely that the world might be in trouble. That serves to reflect a lot of light. But the acidification is not to good either.
For you to place the full blame on America makes you as foolish as the far right and those that oppose stopping GW.
That is actually not conservatives. That is neo-cons and far right baptists that push that garbage (roughly reagan and W). These are the same ppl that dropped taxes under reagan and pushed massive deficits. And that was for ALL EIGHT YEARS. What was amazing is that Carter had already put in place the solutions by de-regulating the airlines and oil/gas, as well as starting to tighten the money supply by appointing volker. True conservatives KNOW that Obama is American, and that Climate change is a reality. Though a number of them do believe to some degree in creationism.
Here, you have to be able to bend and twist logic and out and out lie about it. While some scientists are liars, the majority of trial lawyers are liars.
that even if the judge is honest and say that yes, man is warming the planet, then business will STILL appeal and if won all the way through, they will still deny that man can make an impact. And it the "trial" is lost, then what? Absolutely nothing.
is that we have given LOADS more money to Russia to keep them going and that is not considered part of those modules. However, I have to believe that getting all the countries of the ISS to go to the moon AND mars is in everybodies best interest. We need to jointly develop space and learn to work closer together. It is the same spirit that NATO did for the west.
If MS is still threatened (which they are), then money will flow to SCO. Likewise, if McNealy is working for Oracle, then Oracle will quietly fund it, and then deny it.
Dick Shelby is very nervous about NASA going to private contractors. He wants to make certain that they only have a VERY little bit of money. RIght now, Shelby's area is up for all sorts of NASA money in his area. So, from his POV, if we use Russia AND China for transportation to the ISS, then we do not need private ventures. In addition, Russia is charging us DOUBLE what they charge private ppl (25 vs 57). China is expected to charge about the same. And yes, it will mean a transfer of tech since China would then be on the ISS.
OTH, if we use that money for private ventures and keep shuttle going until ONE company is aloft with cargo rated (be is ULA or SpaceX, etc), then it will costs about the same, have greater capacity to lift and more importantly, we will see costs drop down the road. If we want to increase what NASA can do, then we must lower the costs of getting to space. SpaceX is actually lower costs than is Russia OR china (unless they subsidize it, which China already does by fixed money and trade barriers).
Oh dick shelby would rather sell out America than lose the money to his area. A neo-con through and through.
Seriously, they know each other. Cohen goes after this, THEN drops the suite. BUT, Porter goes after Google. I wonder if cohen will end up with millions after this? Sounds complicated, but it makes more sense then does the actions that have occurred so far.
pilots in the 60 who spoke quietly about these. Of course, scientists said that no such thing exists and as such, most pilots kept real quiet about it. Only at wild 60's parties would I hear some of these guys talking about it.
Not if it is required. As I said earlier, this needs to be FAIR and can not compromise our national security. The condition of China and India certainly is not a fair economic situation and China would absolutely be a compromise of national security.
Nearly ALL of the small startups have an astronaut on-board that is pushing the company. More importantly, they are all saying that this is the way that it should go. Simpler systems; less costs; more launches leading to lower price and improved safety. IF NASA also pushes for bigelow in creating a private location, this will allow a LOT more launches to take place, which will only improve the costs for all.