no, the equipment is not available either. Evevn if there was a factory full of equipment set aside for future energia production (there isn't) you would still essentialy need to start from scratch - and aremuch better off starting from scratch.
Energia exists only in the same sense that Staurn V - somebody still has the plans. The hangar sitter is a bout as much a usable launcher as the 2-3 display copies of staurn v. nice to look at but not usable to launch anything.
ESA paid for about 50% of Beagle - but most of the satellite and its problems were indepepdent from ESA (that is, ESA didn't manage the project). The summary of its failure was approximately - too much on too small amount of money too fast.
As a result we now have a good idea on how cheaply we can make a planetary probe with present technology.
You are discounting micro and nanosats that are increasingly more used. Or why do you think there is a special platform for them that flies every time Ariane 5 does?
URKH! Why the heck is this rated as 'Informative'!???
So - read the original article. This was a drop test of a 1/6 scale model of a reusable space vehicle under development. If you know utterly nothing about why drop tests of scaled - and later full scale - vehicle models and vehciles are done, then sure, you could come up with a response you just did. But in such a case - why the **** did you bother to write it? To show your total ignorance?
The thing you are missing is the "with a few exceptions". You would get it because you wanted a well-integrated system with system managment tools and not something somebody slapped together using LFS yesterday. The same reasoning applies when you buy a system and run AIX/Solaris/HPUX/etc on it.
But the biggest flaw in your argument is that this is slashdot, so you are forever arguing against people who heard "java is slow" from somebody and will never learn otherwise because downloading java and finding out is too hard for them.
If you are not able to sufficently handle programming - be it SQL programming or it mixed with some scripting or just embedded SQL then I really don't see where your claim to understanding data comes from?
If you can handle SQL - from whatever higher level lang - then you can do a proof of concept of such a language and get people interested. If you cannot actually handle databases at that level, then frankly your claims of understanding data or having any plausible notion as to whetever hackers understood it or not is frankly entirely ridiculous. Becuase there is no way at all for you to understand any but teh most superficial issues that go into database and database system design.
Well, sort of. They have a bunch of valid issues with some of the endless blather of hype coming from other people and good theory based objections to some other things. And not too good social skills.
SQL is not the only database access language. It is simply the de facto standard database acess language for client-server relational databases. which means that most people never meet any others
Maybe you should find out what 'STREAMS' is and what it measures? As a hint, basicly no interactions with the OS happen in the benchmark run - its all about memory bandwidth, measured in a NUMA scalable way.
You would have the same Streams score even if the kernel running on the machine used a monolithic giant lock - it does not say anything about OS - as opposed to memory hardware - scalability at all.
Come on, this is slashdot, that unfortunately tends to serve as a site for losers who don't even run Linux themselves to pretend to be c00l l33t l1nux h4xors and pour shitty comments on everything that is in their small minds not cool.
You are wrong - access to source code doesn't make you count. Way too many lusers have source code they can't make heads or tails out of, never mind compile or change. In fact 99% of computer users are like this.
Slashdot Mirror
no, the equipment is not available either. Evevn if there was a factory full of equipment set aside for future energia production (there isn't) you would still essentialy need to start from scratch - and aremuch better off starting from scratch.
Besides - NASA didn't manufacture Starun V-s.
Basicly becuase they need the launcher in a certain timeframe and there is no way any alternative technology will be ready in time?
Energia exists only in the same sense that Staurn V - somebody still has the plans. The hangar sitter is a bout as much a usable launcher as the 2-3 display copies of staurn v. nice to look at but not usable to launch anything.
ESA paid for about 50% of Beagle - but most of the satellite and its problems were indepepdent from ESA (that is, ESA didn't manage the project). The summary of its failure was approximately - too much on too small amount of money too fast.
As a result we now have a good idea on how cheaply we can make a planetary probe with present technology.
you forgot to add that it is pure wapourware
You are discounting micro and nanosats that are increasingly more used. Or why do you think there is a special platform for them that flies every time Ariane 5 does?
Not that differnt from any other slashdot thread where over 90% of teh posters have no information (never mind expertise) on the topic at hand.
Because utterly nobody in the Real World (tm) cares one bit whetever something is SSTO or not. It is a completely useless concept.
This is not a derivative of or related to Hermes.
URKH! Why the heck is this rated as 'Informative'!???
So - read the original article. This was a drop test of a 1/6 scale model of a reusable space vehicle under development. If you know utterly nothing about why drop tests of scaled - and later full scale - vehicle models and vehciles are done, then sure, you could come up with a response you just did. But in such a case - why the **** did you bother to write it? To show your total ignorance?
The thing you are missing is the "with a few exceptions". You would get it because you wanted a well-integrated system with system managment tools and not something somebody slapped together using LFS yesterday. The same reasoning applies when you buy a system and run AIX/Solaris/HPUX/etc on it.
you should learn better algorithms than bubblesort. or think of less obvious ways to troll.
But the biggest flaw in your argument is that this is slashdot, so you are forever arguing against people who heard "java is slow" from somebody and will never learn otherwise because downloading java and finding out is too hard for them.
If you are not able to sufficently handle programming - be it SQL programming or it mixed with some scripting or just embedded SQL then I really don't see where your claim to understanding data comes from?
If you can handle SQL - from whatever higher level lang - then you can do a proof of concept of such a language and get people interested. If you cannot actually handle databases at that level, then frankly your claims of understanding data or having any plausible notion as to whetever hackers understood it or not is frankly entirely ridiculous. Becuase there is no way at all for you to understand any but teh most superficial issues that go into database and database system design.
Well, sort of. They have a bunch of valid issues with some of the endless blather of hype coming from other people and good theory based objections to some other things. And not too good social skills.
So stop your silly bitching on slashdot and go make one?
SQL is not the only database access language. It is simply the de facto standard database acess language for client-server relational databases. which means that most people never meet any others
Maybe you should find out what 'STREAMS' is and what it measures? As a hint, basicly no interactions with the OS happen in the benchmark run - its all about memory bandwidth, measured in a NUMA scalable way.
You would have the same Streams score even if the kernel running on the machine used a monolithic giant lock - it does not say anything about OS - as opposed to memory hardware - scalability at all.
Come on, this is slashdot, that unfortunately tends to serve as a site for losers who don't even run Linux themselves to pretend to be c00l l33t l1nux h4xors and pour shitty comments on everything that is in their small minds not cool.
Get more losers^H^H^H^H^Hdevelopers to have a clue about portability? And no, it is a different thing from "runs on both suse and redhat on x86".
You can use the single LWP/thread model in Solaris 8 too - just switch to the alternative libpthread.
You can run a 64 bit kernel on an Ultra 1. Its just not the default due to some silly CPU bugs that potentialy let somebody do a F00F style attack.
You are wrong - access to source code doesn't make you count. Way too many lusers have source code they can't make heads or tails out of, never mind compile or change. In fact 99% of computer users are like this.
Not any that want to have any real stability?
Just more laughable examples of "stability" - 2.6.x is out but its also out several months too early.