Your confusing creation with innovation, innovation is the introduction of something new, if I paint a picture of a kitty cat, it is a creative process, but its not innovative, its been done before, my kitty cat picture would be my unique creation, but its not a new invention. Now if I painted it onto the moon using an orbital cannon, that would be innovative, cos its a new way of painting a kitty cat.
oh you think do you? with a few adjustments, I could use the tusks as runners, construct a sturdy frame with the hide stretched over the bones, and using the skull as a burner and the heart and lungs as fuel injector and air intakes, the stomach could be used as a fuel tank and I would have a Blubber Powered Walrus Rocket Sled, easily faster than most production cars in icy conditions.
Ha! Never underestimate the powers of a dead walrus! (or a twisted imagination)
Re:to all those bagging NASA..
on
NASA Turns 50
·
· Score: 0
None, how many billions of dollars have I flushed straight down the toilet? None!
Re:Selling you yesterday's future today
on
NASA Turns 50
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
um, why would they want a cost effective system? That just means that will get less money.
Slightly off-topic. It seems to me that the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter should be allocating some of its observing time looking for asteroids. It has the distinct advantage of being able to spot an object whose current orbit puts it on a direct path to the earth - something you can't see from the earth because the object isn't moving in our field of view. That's especially true for objects coming from the sun-side.
I'm not a telescope expert, but something tells me, instruments designed to look down at a planets surface would not be effective looking out into space for bits of rock.
Ahhh, an ICBM works just fine at getting the nuke to it's target, but the target has a lot of warning, from when they see the launch, till the nukes hit is time to do a lot of things, including evacuating stuff, and sending retaliation, now if the nukes drop from orbit, straight down onto the poor fuckers head, their warning if they manage to spot a tiny re-entry module decending straight down at high speed, will be a very short amount of time indeed, thus meaning no time to prepare for impact or retaliate on as large a scale, fueling up lots of land based ICBMs despatching bombers, and evacuating major targets to preserve as much second strike capabilities as possible is all out. The enemy would be hit much harder, and thier retaliation would be much smaller. Consisting only of any ICBMs already fueled, and hidden capabilities on submarines.
A strike on a country like Pakistan or India from space could probably be done with no retaliation at all, thier liquid fueled rockets just wouldn't be able to launch in time. And it would tip the scales massively against china, as it had a lot of land based missiles but only 1 nuclear submarine carrying only 12 single warhead missiles (as opposed to the US whch has 1152 warheads in it's submarines). So there are lots of reasons why the US would want nukes in space.
well that would be a great idea for two reasons, firstly the mimes would not be affected by the lack of sound carrying gasses in space, and more importantly, the less mimes on the planet, the better.
leagalise 'em and lets grow the drugs here then. That would solve the problem, if only it was that simple to source diamonds and coltan and oil in our own countries.
What Afria needs is not more free rice, but less bullets. Someone should make website, and for every silly word game you guess right, they pay a ninja to sneak into an african country and steal a bullet.
with a rucksack, you walk through with it on your back, with a suitcase, you stick it through the hole for suitcases, it's not difficult to work this out.
Nah, if Slashdotters were capable of pulling off a hit like this, George Lucas would have been found mysteriously dead with a Jar Jar Binks plush toy shoved down his throat long ago.
Slashdot Mirror
Your confusing creation with innovation, innovation is the introduction of something new, if I paint a picture of a kitty cat, it is a creative process, but its not innovative, its been done before, my kitty cat picture would be my unique creation, but its not a new invention. Now if I painted it onto the moon using an orbital cannon, that would be innovative, cos its a new way of painting a kitty cat.
...now we find a way to launch approximately 40bn gallons of fine single-malt whisky to Mars.
no no, we just need to send barley, oak casks and some funny shaped copper tubes.
If your willing to wait a bit longer, we only need to send barley and acorns, I'm sure there must be some copper on Mars.
Natural gas? Crude oil?
Same shit, different phase.
That's a nasty cough you have there.
Isn't that how Buddhism got started?
Too right, I just modded it informative too, and your post as well, so your ka... oh wait. whoops.
oh you think do you? with a few adjustments, I could use the tusks as runners, construct a sturdy frame with the hide stretched over the bones, and using the skull as a burner and the heart and lungs as fuel injector and air intakes, the stomach could be used as a fuel tank and I would have a Blubber Powered Walrus Rocket Sled, easily faster than most production cars in icy conditions.
Ha! Never underestimate the powers of a dead walrus! (or a twisted imagination)
None, how many billions of dollars have I flushed straight down the toilet? None!
um, why would they want a cost effective system? That just means that will get less money.
Hindu push-ups? Is that like normal push-ups, but a Muslim comes in and kicks you halfway through?
Fuck that, try moshing for a real man's dance style. Far more energetic, plus piggy back wall of death is like 7000 times cooler than the worm.
Plus rock chicks are waaaaay cooler than any girls you will meet a a lame RnB club.
cycle slowly?
If you cycle like a scally on a BMX there's no risk at all, cos your crotch doesn't even get near your saddle. ;)
Newsagents are there to deliver the newspapers to thier customers, they are not charities for teaching kids about work n responsibilities.
the collective noun for dorks with no life is the same whatever game your playing.
Slightly off-topic. It seems to me that the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter should be allocating some of its observing time looking for asteroids. It has the distinct advantage of being able to spot an object whose current orbit puts it on a direct path to the earth - something you can't see from the earth because the object isn't moving in our field of view. That's especially true for objects coming from the sun-side.
I'm not a telescope expert, but something tells me, instruments designed to look down at a planets surface would not be effective looking out into space for bits of rock.
or we could send him to replay his role in Pearl Harbour to the asteroid and the poor thing will surely plunge itself into the sun to get away.
Ahhh, an ICBM works just fine at getting the nuke to it's target, but the target has a lot of warning, from when they see the launch, till the nukes hit is time to do a lot of things, including evacuating stuff, and sending retaliation, now if the nukes drop from orbit, straight down onto the poor fuckers head, their warning if they manage to spot a tiny re-entry module decending straight down at high speed, will be a very short amount of time indeed, thus meaning no time to prepare for impact or retaliate on as large a scale, fueling up lots of land based ICBMs despatching bombers, and evacuating major targets to preserve as much second strike capabilities as possible is all out. The enemy would be hit much harder, and thier retaliation would be much smaller. Consisting only of any ICBMs already fueled, and hidden capabilities on submarines.
A strike on a country like Pakistan or India from space could probably be done with no retaliation at all, thier liquid fueled rockets just wouldn't be able to launch in time. And it would tip the scales massively against china, as it had a lot of land based missiles but only 1 nuclear submarine carrying only 12 single warhead missiles (as opposed to the US whch has 1152 warheads in it's submarines). So there are lots of reasons why the US would want nukes in space.
well that would be a great idea for two reasons, firstly the mimes would not be affected by the lack of sound carrying gasses in space, and more importantly, the less mimes on the planet, the better.
in the magical land of complainers, every moaner who never saw it and talks shit about it deducts $100000 from any profits.
leagalise 'em and lets grow the drugs here then. That would solve the problem, if only it was that simple to source diamonds and coltan and oil in our own countries.
Grow your own! or synthesise some LSD!
What Afria needs is not more free rice, but less bullets. Someone should make website, and for every silly word game you guess right, they pay a ninja to sneak into an african country and steal a bullet.
with a rucksack, you walk through with it on your back, with a suitcase, you stick it through the hole for suitcases, it's not difficult to work this out.
What's worse than finding a spammer's dead baby in your kettle?
Not finding it.
Nah, if Slashdotters were capable of pulling off a hit like this, George Lucas would have been found mysteriously dead with a Jar Jar Binks plush toy shoved down his throat long ago.