Can you fit "NASA" in the summary a little more, you fucking crackpot submitter? This is a stupid hoax. This isn't NASA. This is just some guy who rented a NASA lab space. Anyone can do that. Just stop. Stupid Space Nutters.
"Cut her lead in half". Give me a break, she is trouncing Trump in the polls. She has a 5 point lead already. No matter how you spin it, she has the largest poll lead of any Presidential candidate at this point of the campaign in history.
That is what all the corporations want, including Apple and Google. Eventually the PC will be dead, and you will only be allowed to connect to the Internet with an "approved" device.
So the largest problem to getting to Mars is getting off of Earth (economically)? Even though we have done it many times in the past, and even have a space station? For some unknown reason we need to get to Mars on the cheap, and it is very complex getting a crew into Earth orbit? Someone should tell them about the ISS.
Nah, what do physicists know about Physics anyway? I have a blog that explains ZPE, EmDrives and generational starships and how they work. That is all you really need. Chemical rockets? Science? That is so 1950s.
It isn't much of a setback to going to Mars. Think of it like a software bug: once they identify it, it will be fixed. Problem solved. Mars is within our reach, you just need to believe.
We should notify SpaceX that in 2017, the laws of physics aren't really that strict. It isn't like they are laws, more like guidelines. No one REALLY understands all that mishmash anyway. Once they understand that fact, they will realize that anything is possible, and they will launch their generational starship immediately. Onward and upward! We will be leaving this rock in no time! The only reason they are still using chemical rockets must be that they are old-fuddy duddies who are unwiillng to learn the New Physics.
I know, right? Why aren't they using EmDrives, or antimatter engines, or railguns, or space elevators? It is almost like they don't believe that they work. But they do: NASA proved it! So again, why use those nasty old chemical propellant rockets? Why?
True. Imagine how amazing it will be once the first company is able to use a rocket to launch a satellite! Truly a new age will be upon us. And then once they have accomplished that, maybe they can go to Mars. Or even better, another star!
Right. Like repeatedly trying to use chemical rockets to launch satellites into LEO. What are those people thinking? We have been doing that since the 50s! They should be using a space elevator. Or a railgun.
The only surprise here is that SpaceX is still using those nasty chemical rockets. Why aren't they using anti-matter engines? I can think up dozens of better engine designs than chemical propellant!
Space nutter? You don't know how this works. Its like software: iterative waterfall model. You fix it and move on. This really isn't a big deal. They will make sure it won't happen again.
Slashdot Mirror
Can you fit "NASA" in the summary a little more, you fucking crackpot submitter? This is a stupid hoax. This isn't NASA. This is just some guy who rented a NASA lab space. Anyone can do that. Just stop. Stupid Space Nutters.
What about smarties who spell "organizing" as "organising" just to prove how European they are? Learn to talk American! Love it or leave it!
Google is a spyware company. Chrome is their spawn. You are their product.
More plebeians complaining about their walled garden. This is what you asked for: now live with it. Your corporate masters know what is best for you.
They changed their name to "Whoooosh, Inc" soon after that incident.
"Cut her lead in half". Give me a break, she is trouncing Trump in the polls. She has a 5 point lead already. No matter how you spin it, she has the largest poll lead of any Presidential candidate at this point of the campaign in history.
All I care about is if it is a Dell or not. I don't know what a core is.
Because you don't believe hard enough. Off to the reeducation camps with you!
What? But I was told that the future was NOW! We are still going to Mars though, right? Pretty please?
This is unexpectedly insightful. This is the way the corporations want it to be: only "approved" devices connected to the Internet will be legal.
That is what all the corporations want, including Apple and Google. Eventually the PC will be dead, and you will only be allowed to connect to the Internet with an "approved" device.
So the largest problem to getting to Mars is getting off of Earth (economically)? Even though we have done it many times in the past, and even have a space station? For some unknown reason we need to get to Mars on the cheap, and it is very complex getting a crew into Earth orbit? Someone should tell them about the ISS.
I'm thinking terrorist drone strike. I did a subframe analysis that was conclusive.
Nah, what do physicists know about Physics anyway? I have a blog that explains ZPE, EmDrives and generational starships and how they work. That is all you really need. Chemical rockets? Science? That is so 1950s.
I like how you think. Do you have a newsletter or blog?
I think you are right. It was a bomb. I did my own analysis and confirmed it. What do you think?
It isn't much of a setback to going to Mars. Think of it like a software bug: once they identify it, it will be fixed. Problem solved. Mars is within our reach, you just need to believe.
We should notify SpaceX that in 2017, the laws of physics aren't really that strict. It isn't like they are laws, more like guidelines. No one REALLY understands all that mishmash anyway. Once they understand that fact, they will realize that anything is possible, and they will launch their generational starship immediately. Onward and upward! We will be leaving this rock in no time! The only reason they are still using chemical rockets must be that they are old-fuddy duddies who are unwiillng to learn the New Physics.
I know, right? Why aren't they using EmDrives, or antimatter engines, or railguns, or space elevators? It is almost like they don't believe that they work. But they do: NASA proved it! So again, why use those nasty old chemical propellant rockets? Why?
True. Imagine how amazing it will be once the first company is able to use a rocket to launch a satellite! Truly a new age will be upon us. And then once they have accomplished that, maybe they can go to Mars. Or even better, another star!
Right. Like repeatedly trying to use chemical rockets to launch satellites into LEO. What are those people thinking? We have been doing that since the 50s! They should be using a space elevator. Or a railgun.
Right! Why aren't they using a railgun? Or a space elevator? Don't they read stackexchange?
The only surprise here is that SpaceX is still using those nasty chemical rockets. Why aren't they using anti-matter engines? I can think up dozens of better engine designs than chemical propellant!
Space nutter? You don't know how this works. Its like software: iterative waterfall model. You fix it and move on. This really isn't a big deal. They will make sure it won't happen again.
What a cynic! Zuckerburg and Elon are doing this for good reasons I am sure. What is good for them, is good for you!