When I lived in the UK, there was a big blank space on the official maps just outside town. Anyone who lived near there knew it was the local nuclear weapons dump, and any Soviet spy who drove past would see the buildings that mysteriously didn't appear on the map, and know it must be something important enough to hide, and therefore important enough to bomb in wartime.
Most realistic estimates say it's only going to cost one billion per launch, not several.
It's going to fly once every couple of years, if you're lucky. It's going to require thousands of people to prepare it for launch. It's going to require all the facilities for those thousands of people, and more who aren't involved in the launch, but are involved in the rest of the program.
If you think NASA can fund that for $500,000,000 a year, I've got a bridge you might like to buy. Remeber, a shuttle launch didn't cost $1,500,000,000 because of the variable costs of each launch, it cost that much because of the fixed costs of keeping them flying.
SpaceX will be flying astronauts in their Dragon capsule. I believe the CST100 is designed to be Falcon-compatible, but it's unlikely to ever fly on one.
As for SLS, there isn't a single budgeted mission outside low orbit. And there's not likely to be, when it will cost billions of dollars every time it flies, due to the high development costs, low flight rate, and standing army and facilities required to launch it.
Uh, no, it's not. There's nothing 'deep space' about SLS that's not 'deep space' about Falcon 9. You can launch a deep space probe on Falcon 9, and you could launch a deep space probe on SLS if it's ever built.
SLS, as designed, is just a very expensive way to put 70 tons into orbit. Maybe, at some point, if Congress funds it, it might become a very expensive way to put 100-130 tons into orbit. Well before then, Falcon Heavy should be putting 50 tons into orbit for less than 5% of the cost of an SLS launch.
Yes. Even pilot astronauts are--or were--allowed to wear glasses or contact lenses. I believe the concern with laser surgery was about the effect of pressure changes on the eyeball.
I would presume that TRIM marks the block as unused, so a background erase process can zero it when the drive isn't busy. From what I remember, the main goal of TRIM was to eliminate performance bottlenecks when the SSD had to overwrite previously-used blocks which the operating system had already freed up.
... treat it as a regular unencrypted drive and apply proper encryption on top. Next.
While true, the problem with that approach is that the SSDs compress the data you write to them to improve performance and wear-levelling. So, if you encrypt the disk at the operating system level, you lose all that.
Obviously, if most of your data is already compressed, it won't matter.
Sigh all you want. If people like you were willing to pay extra for the human touch, then there would be two tiers of tickets offered by airlines: self-checkin and human check-in. Human check-in would of course be an extra $100 or so. Still interested?
Yes, it's called 'Business Class'. I walk straight up to the checkin counter, hand over my bags, and they do the rest, so I don't have to worry about what passport I'm supposed to use this time, or whatever other nonsense has changed since I last flew.
Right, and eliminating every single government in the world will result in fewer people killing each other? Excellent hypothesis.
Governments murdered a couple of hundred million people in the last century, and threatened to murder billions on a few minutes' notice. Free market murderers would have to work pretty darn hard to keep up with that.
Slashdot Mirror
When I lived in the UK, there was a big blank space on the official maps just outside town. Anyone who lived near there knew it was the local nuclear weapons dump, and any Soviet spy who drove past would see the buildings that mysteriously didn't appear on the map, and know it must be something important enough to hide, and therefore important enough to bomb in wartime.
The whole thing was just stupid.
Hey, it's the Anti-Space-Nutter Nutter. Haven't seen you around for a while. How've you been?
I always pictured Elon as Francisco d'Anconia.
No, that was Alan Greenspan.
True.
But the SLS should be able to lift twice as much as SpaceX's future Falcon Heavy and 10 times the current Faclon 9.
Nope. The SLS will launch up to 70 tons. It may one day launch more, but that'll require a whole load more development funding.
If we want to launch man into deep space, we are going to need something close to SSL than the Falcon 9.
Nope. You just need more launches. If NASA are going to send humans to Mars, they're not going to do it with a single 130 ton launch.
Most realistic estimates say it's only going to cost one billion per launch, not several.
It's going to fly once every couple of years, if you're lucky. It's going to require thousands of people to prepare it for launch. It's going to require all the facilities for those thousands of people, and more who aren't involved in the launch, but are involved in the rest of the program.
If you think NASA can fund that for $500,000,000 a year, I've got a bridge you might like to buy. Remeber, a shuttle launch didn't cost $1,500,000,000 because of the variable costs of each launch, it cost that much because of the fixed costs of keeping them flying.
SpaceX will be flying astronauts in their Dragon capsule. I believe the CST100 is designed to be Falcon-compatible, but it's unlikely to ever fly on one.
As for SLS, there isn't a single budgeted mission outside low orbit. And there's not likely to be, when it will cost billions of dollars every time it flies, due to the high development costs, low flight rate, and standing army and facilities required to launch it.
The SLS is a deep space vehicle.
Uh, no, it's not. There's nothing 'deep space' about SLS that's not 'deep space' about Falcon 9. You can launch a deep space probe on Falcon 9, and you could launch a deep space probe on SLS if it's ever built.
SLS, as designed, is just a very expensive way to put 70 tons into orbit. Maybe, at some point, if Congress funds it, it might become a very expensive way to put 100-130 tons into orbit. Well before then, Falcon Heavy should be putting 50 tons into orbit for less than 5% of the cost of an SLS launch.
They're getting into the phone business for the same reason Apple did; to tie phone users to their app/video/ebook/music stores.
I haven't looked in detail, but I presume the phone is using their version of Android, like the Kindle?
They've been doing this for close to 20 years, you think that would be plenty of time to actually make money.
Dude, making money is just so 19th century.
They're short more money than SpaceX spent to develop the Falcon 9.
Yes. Even pilot astronauts are--or were--allowed to wear glasses or contact lenses. I believe the concern with laser surgery was about the effect of pressure changes on the eyeball.
Last I looked, you couldn't become an astronaut if you had laser eye surgery?
I would presume that TRIM marks the block as unused, so a background erase process can zero it when the drive isn't busy. From what I remember, the main goal of TRIM was to eliminate performance bottlenecks when the SSD had to overwrite previously-used blocks which the operating system had already freed up.
... treat it as a regular unencrypted drive and apply proper encryption on top. Next.
While true, the problem with that approach is that the SSDs compress the data you write to them to improve performance and wear-levelling. So, if you encrypt the disk at the operating system level, you lose all that.
Obviously, if most of your data is already compressed, it won't matter.
It can loose it's own keys?
My current Intel SSD encrypts everything and has a special command to wipe the key to 'secure delete' the contents. So I'm not sure what's new here.
How can you say that and yet still buy such devices? It's not like one doesn't have a choice...
Yes, they could buy Android instead. Or Windows.
Oh, hang one...
Sigh all you want. If people like you were willing to pay extra for the human touch, then there would be two tiers of tickets offered by airlines: self-checkin and human check-in. Human check-in would of course be an extra $100 or so. Still interested?
Yes, it's called 'Business Class'. I walk straight up to the checkin counter, hand over my bags, and they do the rest, so I don't have to worry about what passport I'm supposed to use this time, or whatever other nonsense has changed since I last flew.
I bought a Windows 8 laptop, pulled the HDD, tossed it back in the box, pugged in an SSD, and installed Mint.
Yeah, let's all spend $1,000 on a 'smart' dryer to save $10 in electricity. Makes total sense.
Right, and eliminating every single government in the world will result in fewer people killing each other? Excellent hypothesis.
Governments murdered a couple of hundred million people in the last century, and threatened to murder billions on a few minutes' notice. Free market murderers would have to work pretty darn hard to keep up with that.
Dude, you might want to actually learn something about the case.
But they have apparently 'fixed' the code that allowed a developer to ensure this never happened... by making it a no-op.
Would be more exciting to go all the way to the winged, manned, flyback Saturn V first stage proposal.
There was only 1 loss on ascent and 1 loss on decent with too few flights to show if those single losses had a probability of greater than 1 in 500.
Now you're really getting into wacko-world.
Actually it's quite hard. That's why only 3 countries have managed to do it.
I believe that would be 'all three countries thave have actually launched astronauts'? Or have I forgotten any?