Count me in as a space nerd then.
Sadly, I have yet to see a post that includes "ACA out of detent". I really am pathetic when it comes to this kind of thing...
Thank you for assuming that I'm not yet in the real world. For what it's worth, I have worked for my current employer since before you went to college. You may disagree with my opinion, but that does not mean I have no idea what I'm talking about.
I don't know about your employer, but my employer does not "put a computer on my desk" for me to use or be fired. I actually get to test (gasp) different systems and see which works best for a given task. I've used every flavor of Windows since 3.0, OS/2 1.3 and above, several flavors of Linux, several Macs and even a few versions of BeOS. (HP and Sun UNIX as well, but not "on my desk") I realize this is not the case for the general office worker bee.
Your point about Apples in your grade school is interesting, but not necessarily relevant. I was referring to college computer labs in my original post. College graduates become IT Managers, CIO's and so forth, who in turn recommend the equipment that they know. It's all about the right tool for the job. True, Apple is not the dominant player in the office productivity space, but they are dominant in some industries. Look at any commercial print shop / graphic arts house and you're likely to find more Macs than PC's. It's all about the right tool for the job, not "use this PC or be fired".
Let's see... Microsoft/IBM/Dell/etc. fund college computer labs. Provide equipment, training, software, etc. to college professors. Get said professors to teach how to use Windows and Microsoft apps (Excel, Word, etc.) and so on...
New college grads enter workforce and use the tools they used in college. Need a home PC? Do you buy something you'll have to learn or go with what you know? That's a pretty compelling reason to pay attention to the "iPod Generation".
To put this another way, imagine if 15-20 years ago all college computer labs were full of Apple/Mac computers?
If you're not a liberal in your 20's, you don't have a heart.
If you're not a conservative in your 40's, you don't have a brain.
If you're not an independent in your 60's, you don't have a conscience.
not counting the technologies needed for a human habitat for use on the Moon...which would likely require a nuclear fission power plant to make it through the 14 day lunar night
Wouldn't it make sense to set up a base at either pole (or both) and use solar panels that can be rotated for optimal alignment? In addition to the benefit to power generation, I think a polar location would make for easier radio communication with Earth
They usually have one big employer (like Micron in Boise) and a few much smaller companies that rarely hire and that is it.
I believe the State of Idaho is the largest employer in the Boise area, followed by Micron. However, Hewlett-Packard has a huge facility in Boise (~4000 employees, and is the "home of the LaserJet printer"), the JR Simplot company is a large employer in Boise, as is Albertsons headquarters -- at least for the time being...
Idaho Falls may be a one horse town, but Boise is not.
Now don't get me wrong, I grew up in Idaho, but you need to realize that it is a complete backwater.
I grew up in Idaho as well -- in perhaps the most backwater town in SE Idaho. However, based on your comment about spending 6 months unemployed I assume you haven't been to Boise lately. The economy here is actually quite healthy.
Let's see. You mention being in IF today, from that I assume you're either attending BYU-Idaho or ISU (Pocatello). Having attended both of those schools myself, I would agree that going to school at ISU is indeed a very, very bad idea. Please don't judge Idaho based on Pocatello.
On the other hand, if you're not actually able to be happy in Rexburg all I can say is your experience there is the opposite of mine...
I don't remember enough details about the test to say whether the probes were AI or human operated. The explanation I recall hearing was that the human was able to quickly notice the "anomaly" due to a greater field of vision. Think of a 6 foot tall human vs. the original Mars Pathfinder. (I wish I could remember where I read this to see if my recollection is even close to what really happened.)
I agree that the Mars rovers have provided a wealth of scientific data. I think it's all about the right tool for the job. I believe there is a place for both manned and unmanned missions and I'd like to see more funding for both.
But moon missions aren't just about science. A robot can't tell you what it feels like to be there. The famous "Earthrise" picture was not a planned shot, the astronauts on Apollo 8 recognized that they were seeing a very unique view for the first time in history and captured it for posterity.
I watched in awe when Pathfinder rolled off it's little platform and showed us the view of the Martian surface. I had a similar experience with both of the current rovers. However, I still get goosebumps when I watch the video of Neil Armstrong climbing down the ladder and setting foot on the moon. Al Shepard's "miles and miles" golf shot let would-be golfers everywhere vicariously live that moment. The Apollo 13 'successful failure' showed man's ability to adapt to unexpected circumstances and live to tell about it.
You are probably right that it is cheaper and more scientifically useful to use remotely-operated rovers and probes, but to me it's the difference between visiting somewhere in Google Earth, or going there in person.
Actually, my emphasis on the word *HUMAN* is taken directly from the post I was replying to. However, if I had mod points, I'd mod you funny just for "successfully landing chickens at the intergalactic burger joint"
That's right. I should know better than to post from memory late on a Friday night...
As punishment, I'll go re-read James A Michener's Space, which documents the fictional Apollo 18 mission, and is a decent novel if you can get through the first several chapters. IIRC
This return to Apollo style capsules is an embarassment, a belated acknowledgement that we went down the wrong path and now must back up and start again.
I guess it's a matter of perspective. The return to Apollo-style capsules is a great move. I believe it shows that the Apollo design teams really got it right. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Imagine how great these new Apollo style capsules will be with 40 years of materials science improvements. I can't wait!
On the other hand, I agree that the Shuttle was the wrong path. It is/was an expermiental vehicle, neutered by politics. Who knows what it might have been had they stayed true to the original vision. Alas, politics is the fountain of compromise, and compromise is the enemy of engineering.
but if we want to prioritize, wouldn't billions of dollars be better spent focusing on fixing our own messed up planet?
Billions and billions of dollars have been spend trying to "fix our own messed up planet". This was exactly the reasoning that got the budgets for Apollo 19 and Apollo 20 cancelled. (People pointed to the Vietnam war, the homeless, and so forth and asked, "Why are we spending money on the moon when we have so many problems here on Earth??") The sad fact is that we had the most awesome heavy lift capability this planet had ever seen and we threw it away. Even with minimal funding for Apollo / Saturn hardware, we could have built a real space station in just a few launches. Put another way, the US went from first sub-orbital flight (Alan Shepard, Freedom 7, May 1961) to "concluding man's first exploration of the moon" (Apollo 18, December 1972) in 11 short years. Since 1972, we've just been going in circles.
As far as the value of "putting men on a rock in space" is concerned, it's more than just the science value. That is not to discount the science value which is very real. I heard of an experiment that was done with a simulated "alien" environment. First the unmanned probes (may have been rovers) were given their chance to explore the area. They found nothing remarkable. Then they sent in the *HUMANS* who within seconds discovered a soda can that obviously did not belong in the simulated environment.
That may be an urban legand, but I believe it makes a valid point. A trained *HUMAN* scientist can quickly determine what is relevant and what is not, and focus on the relevant. That is not to say that all exploration should be manned. I believe the manned and unmanned missions should be complimentary, not competitors.
On another occasion I heard a Geek Squad guy tell an elderly couple that hyperthreading was "like having 2 processors in 1." I nearly flipped my lid, but that's a different story for a different day.
Considering a) the audience and b) the fact that HT "allows a Hyper-Threading equipped processor to pretend to be two "logical" processors to the host operating system" (per Wikipedia), I fail to see why this oversimplificaton was egregious to the point of lid-flipping.
In my opinion, this sounds like nothing more malicious than adapting the message to the audience.
On the other hand, replacing a new battery to stop a buzzing heatsink does show inexperience, ineptitude, and incompetence.
Slashdot Mirror
The Bose Einstein Motto: No bass, relatively speaking
That's the scariest thing I've seen all year!
Count me in as a space nerd then. Sadly, I have yet to see a post that includes "ACA out of detent". I really am pathetic when it comes to this kind of thing...
*WHOOSH*
*WHOOSH*
*WHOOSH*
*WHOOSH*
I'm pretty sure that was the sound of a tongue-in-cheek post zooming over several posters' heads
John Aaron -- is that you?
I don't know about your employer, but my employer does not "put a computer on my desk" for me to use or be fired. I actually get to test (gasp) different systems and see which works best for a given task. I've used every flavor of Windows since 3.0, OS/2 1.3 and above, several flavors of Linux, several Macs and even a few versions of BeOS. (HP and Sun UNIX as well, but not "on my desk") I realize this is not the case for the general office worker bee.
Your point about Apples in your grade school is interesting, but not necessarily relevant. I was referring to college computer labs in my original post. College graduates become IT Managers, CIO's and so forth, who in turn recommend the equipment that they know. It's all about the right tool for the job. True, Apple is not the dominant player in the office productivity space, but they are dominant in some industries. Look at any commercial print shop / graphic arts house and you're likely to find more Macs than PC's. It's all about the right tool for the job, not "use this PC or be fired".
New college grads enter workforce and use the tools they used in college. Need a home PC? Do you buy something you'll have to learn or go with what you know? That's a pretty compelling reason to pay attention to the "iPod Generation".
To put this another way, imagine if 15-20 years ago all college computer labs were full of Apple/Mac computers?
Sometimes you have to choose between the lesser of two evils. Sometimes it's the evil of two lessers.
Splashdot...news for turds, stuff that splatters?
If you're not a liberal in your 20's, you don't have a heart.
If you're not a conservative in your 40's, you don't have a brain.
If you're not an independent in your 60's, you don't have a conscience.
Just my $.02 worth...
Idaho Falls may be a one horse town, but Boise is not.
On the other hand, if you're not actually able to be happy in Rexburg all I can say is your experience there is the opposite of mine...
I agree that the Mars rovers have provided a wealth of scientific data. I think it's all about the right tool for the job. I believe there is a place for both manned and unmanned missions and I'd like to see more funding for both.
But moon missions aren't just about science. A robot can't tell you what it feels like to be there. The famous "Earthrise" picture was not a planned shot, the astronauts on Apollo 8 recognized that they were seeing a very unique view for the first time in history and captured it for posterity.
I watched in awe when Pathfinder rolled off it's little platform and showed us the view of the Martian surface. I had a similar experience with both of the current rovers. However, I still get goosebumps when I watch the video of Neil Armstrong climbing down the ladder and setting foot on the moon. Al Shepard's "miles and miles" golf shot let would-be golfers everywhere vicariously live that moment. The Apollo 13 'successful failure' showed man's ability to adapt to unexpected circumstances and live to tell about it.
You are probably right that it is cheaper and more scientifically useful to use remotely-operated rovers and probes, but to me it's the difference between visiting somewhere in Google Earth, or going there in person.
Actually, my emphasis on the word *HUMAN* is taken directly from the post I was replying to. However, if I had mod points, I'd mod you funny just for "successfully landing chickens at the intergalactic burger joint"
As punishment, I'll go re-read James A Michener's Space, which documents the fictional Apollo 18 mission, and is a decent novel if you can get through the first several chapters. IIRC
On the other hand, I agree that the Shuttle was the wrong path. It is/was an expermiental vehicle, neutered by politics. Who knows what it might have been had they stayed true to the original vision. Alas, politics is the fountain of compromise, and compromise is the enemy of engineering.
As far as the value of "putting men on a rock in space" is concerned, it's more than just the science value. That is not to discount the science value which is very real. I heard of an experiment that was done with a simulated "alien" environment. First the unmanned probes (may have been rovers) were given their chance to explore the area. They found nothing remarkable. Then they sent in the *HUMANS* who within seconds discovered a soda can that obviously did not belong in the simulated environment.
That may be an urban legand, but I believe it makes a valid point. A trained *HUMAN* scientist can quickly determine what is relevant and what is not, and focus on the relevant. That is not to say that all exploration should be manned. I believe the manned and unmanned missions should be complimentary, not competitors.
I wonder where She Who Must Not Be Named was on that list.
Considering a) the audience and b) the fact that HT "allows a Hyper-Threading equipped processor to pretend to be two "logical" processors to the host operating system" (per Wikipedia), I fail to see why this oversimplificaton was egregious to the point of lid-flipping.
In my opinion, this sounds like nothing more malicious than adapting the message to the audience.
On the other hand, replacing a new battery to stop a buzzing heatsink does show inexperience, ineptitude, and incompetence.
Would the dog be required to answer the phone when your parents call to check up on you?
Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.