Indeed the Ariane is not enough for our needs, and this is why we're developing the Vega rocket for lighter payloads. Anyway, Russia had talks with ESA about joining as a member with lesser status, but Russia wanted to be an equal member.
The stars doesn't represent the member nations. The circle of golden stars represent the solidarity and harmony among the European peoples. There are twelve stars because, according to the EU website (go to FAQ, then "The EU at a glance" and then "Flag"): "There are twelve stars because the number twelve is traditionally the symbol of perfection, completeness and unity. The flag will therefore remain unchanged regardless of future EU enlargements."
The world is not black and white. You can't act all the time with this simplistic binary thinking. "You don't like some of our foreign policies? Well then you're not allowed to like anything that we do!". Eh, yeah that's smart. Why would your music get any worse just because some of the things your president does aren't all good? Why would the entertainment value of your movies get worse? Why do I have to make the choice of either hating you all for everything you do, or to love you all for everything you do?
Absolutely, the political gain will hopefully be huge. I think that the recent expansion will bring stability and more prosperity to parts of Europe that are generally less wealthy than western Europe. This is a good thing. I suspect it wont be easy, but it will be worth it. Isn't it great that countries that have been engaging in wars, cold and hot, now come together in peace? And you're right, the unioniation of Germany is a good example... how are they coming along in reaching the same standard of living?
By the way, regarding uniting Europe, I hear reports that the director of the Russian space agency wants Russia to join the European Space Agency as an equal member! I can't see anything negative in this. I truly hope they can join.:-)
It will cost EU a lot of cash initially, but I believe that in the long run, we all will benefit from it, economically, and also the greater chance for peace throughout Europe. We even got Turkey working hard to change, and that's only because of the remote possibility that one day, maybe, they could apply for membership too.
The idea is not to go to Mars by making a pit stop at the moon. To go to the moon first is, I think, a step towards Mars. Why not establish an outpost on the moon first? This way you could stay there for longer times than if you just go there and back again. You wouldn't have to bring as much fuel with you when you go to the moon - especially not if there is water on the moon from which you can extract rocket fuel. Also, what if you could use rawmaterials from the moon to build a Mars ship? You could build it in L1 perhaps, and launch it from there. Also, long term activities within the earth-moon system will give us a better chance to get experience and develop our technology. And, when we go to Mars, make sure we establish a permanent outpost there, too. Otherwise there is a great risk we will not return for a very long time.
Some blogs I'm interested in, most of them I'm not. Also, some of the news sites I read, some I don't read. I'm more interested in space sites than, say, biology sites. Yet, I feel that I would never forbid something just because I'm not interested in it. I'm kinda weird that way.
'There is no right in the copyright law to make backup copies of motion pictures, so the whole argument that people should have the right to make backup copies of DVDs has no legal support whatsoever,'
But it is true that people don't know much about other cultures or countries. In school, we were taught mostly western history, music and cultures. It wouldn't surprise me if the kids in Asia or Africa are taught mostly about their own region too. I think it's better to ask a "stupid" question than not ask it at all. Sure, people seem to have plenty of misconceptions about Sweden (my country), too. There are icebears there, they think, and they ask why do you need a Navy; isn't Sweden landlocked? ("No, it's not. You're probably thinking of Switzerland," I say.) I'm glad they like our watches and chocolate though.;) But at least the question comes up, and I get a chance to inform them, there is a discussion and we both benefit from it. It's all good. I try to maintain that attitude even when the questions are clearly intentionally made to make fun of me or my country.
Right, if they are advanced enough to come to us, then surely they are intelligent enough to have left religion behind them. After all, religion can't describe the universe, it can't feed us and it can't make us fly.
But, then again, if there ARE technological civilizations out there, they probably wouldn't have to come to us to convert us. They only have to tell us about their religion, and plenty of humans are nuts enough to convert to it.
Yes, sometimes a large truck collide with a bus full of kids. Sometimes an aeroplane crashes right in a suburb with unsuspecting people. These things happen no matter how much we try to avoid them. And one more thing... are you calling the leading X-Prize contestants "imbecile"?
This argument seem to be popping up everytime SETI is discussed. But ok, let's assume that the civilization that wants to communicate with us is very much more advanced than ours. They decide to contact us, because they've seen us on our pale blue dot. Would they use the most advanced communication method imaginable, perhaps a technology based on physics that we don't even know of yet? Or would they realize it's both useless and rude to use something we haven't developed yet, and instead use some other means of communications, such as radio? If they are more advanced than we are, then perhaps they would know that we are here and that we communicate with electromagnetic waves a lot. Even if they did not know anything about us, wouldn't they use a technology that they could be sure we had?
According to the roadmap, ESA wants to land on the moon in 2024 and on mars around 2030. If they're going to pull that off we have to manage manned spaceflight at all, first. I hope the Phoenix will be part of that.
The good thing with this one is that there is actually a prototype, and I hear ESA will include it in its launch programme. Space.com also says that it will, together with Ariane 5 be part of ESA's manned space programme. I certainly hope so.
Good move for everyone involved. More computers will be safer, which means less hacker intrusions and internet viruses, and, Microsoft will not look like the bad guy. At least not for the next five minutes or so. Well done, Microsoft. Now let's see some greatly improved security on Longhorn - you should have learned quite a lot from 9x/NT/XP, right?
MS needs to shape up with the security of their operating systems and office products. If Longhorn becomes a fiasco in this regard, would that be the beginning of the end for MS? Perhaps. Open Source could provide more stable and secure products. My question is this, however: how do you earn money by writing open source? Btw, regarding MS and their poor security: the problem is the lack of competition in the OS and Office markets, I think that they slacked off somehow.
Slashdot Mirror
Since when is it troubling that people want to keep things off from other's eyes? Doesn't everyone want that?
Indeed the Ariane is not enough for our needs, and this is why we're developing the Vega rocket for lighter payloads. Anyway, Russia had talks with ESA about joining as a member with lesser status, but Russia wanted to be an equal member.
The stars doesn't represent the member nations. The circle of golden stars represent the solidarity and harmony among the European peoples. There are twelve stars because, according to the EU website (go to FAQ, then "The EU at a glance" and then "Flag"): "There are twelve stars because the number twelve is traditionally the symbol of perfection, completeness and unity. The flag will therefore remain unchanged regardless of future EU enlargements."
The world is not black and white. You can't act all the time with this simplistic binary thinking. "You don't like some of our foreign policies? Well then you're not allowed to like anything that we do!". Eh, yeah that's smart. Why would your music get any worse just because some of the things your president does aren't all good? Why would the entertainment value of your movies get worse? Why do I have to make the choice of either hating you all for everything you do, or to love you all for everything you do?
By the way, regarding uniting Europe, I hear reports that the director of the Russian space agency wants Russia to join the European Space Agency as an equal member! I can't see anything negative in this. I truly hope they can join. :-)
Are you suggesting that the countries of EU are the least democratic countries?
It will cost EU a lot of cash initially, but I believe that in the long run, we all will benefit from it, economically, and also the greater chance for peace throughout Europe. We even got Turkey working hard to change, and that's only because of the remote possibility that one day, maybe, they could apply for membership too.
The idea is not to go to Mars by making a pit stop at the moon. To go to the moon first is, I think, a step towards Mars. Why not establish an outpost on the moon first? This way you could stay there for longer times than if you just go there and back again. You wouldn't have to bring as much fuel with you when you go to the moon - especially not if there is water on the moon from which you can extract rocket fuel. Also, what if you could use rawmaterials from the moon to build a Mars ship? You could build it in L1 perhaps, and launch it from there. Also, long term activities within the earth-moon system will give us a better chance to get experience and develop our technology. And, when we go to Mars, make sure we establish a permanent outpost there, too. Otherwise there is a great risk we will not return for a very long time.
Some blogs I'm interested in, most of them I'm not. Also, some of the news sites I read, some I don't read. I'm more interested in space sites than, say, biology sites. Yet, I feel that I would never forbid something just because I'm not interested in it. I'm kinda weird that way.
Actually it shouldn't exclude those things either.
It hurts... physically hurts.
Yes :( The parties do tend to get a little wild up here in the eternal cold darkness... good thing we have all the blonde hot chicks :)
Must be something wrong with me, I'm not getting offended. Oh well, I've learned there are plenty of people who would gladly do it for me. :)
But it is true that people don't know much about other cultures or countries. In school, we were taught mostly western history, music and cultures. It wouldn't surprise me if the kids in Asia or Africa are taught mostly about their own region too. I think it's better to ask a "stupid" question than not ask it at all. ;) But at least the question comes up, and I get a chance to inform them, there is a discussion and we both benefit from it. It's all good. I try to maintain that attitude even when the questions are clearly intentionally made to make fun of me or my country.
Sure, people seem to have plenty of misconceptions about Sweden (my country), too. There are icebears there, they think, and they ask why do you need a Navy; isn't Sweden landlocked? ("No, it's not. You're probably thinking of Switzerland," I say.) I'm glad they like our watches and chocolate though.
But, then again, if there ARE technological civilizations out there, they probably wouldn't have to come to us to convert us. They only have to tell us about their religion, and plenty of humans are nuts enough to convert to it.
Yes, sometimes a large truck collide with a bus full of kids. Sometimes an aeroplane crashes right in a suburb with unsuspecting people. These things happen no matter how much we try to avoid them. And one more thing... are you calling the leading X-Prize contestants "imbecile"?
Isn't it possible to inform people who are unable to think for themselves, that there are risks involved?
As they should have stopped the Wright brothers and all the other pioneers from achieving flight? We're not going anywhere with that attitude.
This argument seem to be popping up everytime SETI is discussed. But ok, let's assume that the civilization that wants to communicate with us is very much more advanced than ours. They decide to contact us, because they've seen us on our pale blue dot. Would they use the most advanced communication method imaginable, perhaps a technology based on physics that we don't even know of yet? Or would they realize it's both useless and rude to use something we haven't developed yet, and instead use some other means of communications, such as radio? If they are more advanced than we are, then perhaps they would know that we are here and that we communicate with electromagnetic waves a lot. Even if they did not know anything about us, wouldn't they use a technology that they could be sure we had?
According to the roadmap, ESA wants to land on the moon in 2024 and on mars around 2030. If they're going to pull that off we have to manage manned spaceflight at all, first. I hope the Phoenix will be part of that.
The good thing with this one is that there is actually a prototype, and I hear ESA will include it in its launch programme. Space.com also says that it will, together with Ariane 5 be part of ESA's manned space programme. I certainly hope so.
Good move for everyone involved. More computers will be safer, which means less hacker intrusions and internet viruses, and, Microsoft will not look like the bad guy. At least not for the next five minutes or so. Well done, Microsoft. Now let's see some greatly improved security on Longhorn - you should have learned quite a lot from 9x/NT/XP, right?
MS needs to shape up with the security of their operating systems and office products. If Longhorn becomes a fiasco in this regard, would that be the beginning of the end for MS? Perhaps. Open Source could provide more stable and secure products. My question is this, however: how do you earn money by writing open source? Btw, regarding MS and their poor security: the problem is the lack of competition in the OS and Office markets, I think that they slacked off somehow.
Glad to see the moderators aren't wasting their mod points. +2 Interesting...?
And having people writing software and coming up with algorithms doesn't take resources...?