In NASA's defense, Orion is designed for missions away from Earth and Dragon is for LEO. While Orion will be tested in Earth orbit, so were Apollo components and I don't see that as a bad thing.
Dragon is great and I think SpaceX will get pretty good mileage out of it, both manned and unmanned. I think having a private way to get people into orbit will also help other companies like Bigelow.
Orion and Dragon have different design parameters. Orion is designed to pretty much go anywhere and will be expensive because of it. Dragon is designed to go to LEO as inexpensively as possible. Both of these are good things.
It's funny, but there's some truth to that. Just not in the corporate overlord case.
Back in College in the 1970s, one of the most popular programs on the mainframe was a chat program, allowing you to chat with other people on campus. Many freshman--brand new to college life and not necessarily feeling comfortable--used those programs to talk to people, people they might not normally have met.
It was an interesting way to introduce them to--and get them comfortable with--using a computer. Suddenly, it might dawn on them that they could use this for things like term papers or the like. They might even become interested in how this stuff works.
Yeah, over time the freshmen found other things to do to acclimate. A few would still hang out on the chat programs after their freshman year, mostly to arrange to meet up with other friends.
I agree with you somewhat--the children will end up on Facebook or Twitter because that fulfills an actual need to communicate with other people. But some of them will find other uses for it and some of them will become interested in how they work.
If you'll excuse the analogy, I like to eat meat, but I don't really want to know about the slaughterhouse. One could easily argue that one of the things that killed the Space Shuttle was that it made access to LEO too easy, too mundane, too boring. Most of us are interested in the end-result of science--the part where it gets turned into something useful to our every day lives or helps us in extraordinary ways. We don't want to know about the years of research and development that were done to give us the technology we have today. We'll just use it.
Science is, by and large, boring to most people. We don't want to know about it. We just want the results.
Look, I can point my fingers at cars and cyclists. The whole argument is just stupid. Yes, cars break the rules. Yes, bicyclists break the rules. Does this solve any problem? No. It's just a whine of "You're picking on me!! It's not fair!!"
The issue that I have with cyclists isn't that they break the law--everybody does it. It's just that cyclists believe they shouldn't have to obey them.
There was an incident I read about recently where, due to local complaints, the police hung out around a stop sign and ticketed road users who did not come to a complete stop. They busted a half-dozen car drivers and around 2 dozen bicyclists.
The car drivers paid their tickets. The bicyclists raised a ruckus about how it wasn't fair and the police were targeting them and it wasn't right and they shouldn't have to pay a ticket for driving through a stop sign and the police should be out solving real crimes and not wasting time on bicyclists not stopping at stop signs and bicycling saves the environment and gives exercise and they shouldn't be getting tickets for doing that and everybody is picking on them and it's just not fair!!
Look, a driver in a car is protected by several tons of government-mandated safety equipment. You're not. It's in your interest to follow the traffic laws. If I'm driving a car, run a red light, and I'm broadsided by another car, there's a good chance I'll survive. If I'm bicycling, run a red light, and I'm broadsided by a car, I'm probably dead. So the solution is not to somehow expect a car to stop when I run a red light. The solution is don't run a red light!
That's actually a really clever idea! A pity it's been done--it was called "The Space Shuttle." Perhaps you heard of it.
The Space Shuttle was, essentially, a launch-able space station. It supported 7 astronauts in a shirt-sleeve environment. Experiments were carried out inside and outside the shuttle.
The issue was that the Shuttle could only stay up about 3 weeks or so. The advantage of the ISS is that it stays up much longer, allowing for longer-term experiments.
...and sometimes it passed back and forth a couple of times.
Apple added aliases to System 7 (essentially symbolic links, though a little more clever). Visually, the way you could tell an alias from the real file is that it's name was in italics. So the filename under the icon would say "Microsoft Word" instead of "Microsoft Word". It was a clever idea.
Unfortunately, it didn't work all that well with non-roman characters. There's no Italic in Japanese. So you couldn't tell them apart.
Microsoft implemented shortcuts in Windows 95 (essentially symbolic links--not a little more clever). But, visually, you'd see a little arrow badge in the lower right corner of the icon letting you know this was a shortcut to some other file.
I think System 7.5 or 7.6 fixed it so you got both the italics and the little arrow badge, so Japanese users could now tell what was an alias and what wasn't.
As I see it, it has to do with the order in which things occur.
If I say we should, oh, cancel the H1-B program and you agree with me, you could donate to my campaign. "Free speech." If you say, "I'll give you money to cancel the H1-B program" and I accept it, that's bribery.
Apple was going under in the 90s. Then Microsoft bailed them out to avoid anti-trust problems.
That's not entirely accurate...
Apple did have a fair amount of cash on their books in the 90s (that was part of what inspired the famous Michael Dell quote about shutting down the company and giving the cash back to the shareholders). Microsoft's "bail-out," though, was more about press than about money. $150 million wasn't that much.
You're right that Apple was going under in the 90s. Why? Because everybody said so. And if you're dealing with a company that's going under, do you really want to float them credit? As I understand it, even Motorola was basically making them pay cash for CPUs. Nobody wanted to be left holding the bag.
That makes it difficult to operate.
Apple didn't necessarily need money--again, they had quite a bit. What they needed was a vote of confidence. The agreement with Microsoft provided that vote of confidence that Apple wasn't going to go out of business.
Not sure on that. Remember that ADA concerns disabilities, not illnesses. Since it's the government, I'd be surprised if a list of disabilities isn't somehow defined and that you can't just claim something as a "disability."
For example, if I have Metallophobia (fear of metal), the company does not have to remove all metal from my surroundings.
Well, there's an "environment" everywhere. It may not necessarily be one you'd like to live in, but that doesn't mean it's not an "environment."
For example, I'd imagine you have lots of snakes and lizards in West Texas. They like hot weather--or, more precisely, hot things. So we cover the desert with solar panels and what happens to the snakes and lizards?
I'll grant you, this is Texas, so the answer is, "Who cares?"
Slashdot Mirror
In NASA's defense, Orion is designed for missions away from Earth and Dragon is for LEO. While Orion will be tested in Earth orbit, so were Apollo components and I don't see that as a bad thing.
Dragon is great and I think SpaceX will get pretty good mileage out of it, both manned and unmanned. I think having a private way to get people into orbit will also help other companies like Bigelow.
Orion and Dragon have different design parameters. Orion is designed to pretty much go anywhere and will be expensive because of it. Dragon is designed to go to LEO as inexpensively as possible. Both of these are good things.
I don't know if you noticed, but there's been a war on law enforcement recently.
Seems I missed it, since the number of police officers being killed is 13% lower than last year. And if you figure that there are around 765,000 sworn police officers at the state and local level and, so far this year, there are about 26 police officers killed (or about 0.003%), it's not much of a war.
Well, here's one from Canada. Here's another one from New York. Here's another one from a month ago, though in their defense, there were some criminal acts involved (B&E).
It's funny, but there's some truth to that. Just not in the corporate overlord case.
Back in College in the 1970s, one of the most popular programs on the mainframe was a chat program, allowing you to chat with other people on campus. Many freshman--brand new to college life and not necessarily feeling comfortable--used those programs to talk to people, people they might not normally have met.
It was an interesting way to introduce them to--and get them comfortable with--using a computer. Suddenly, it might dawn on them that they could use this for things like term papers or the like. They might even become interested in how this stuff works.
Yeah, over time the freshmen found other things to do to acclimate. A few would still hang out on the chat programs after their freshman year, mostly to arrange to meet up with other friends.
I agree with you somewhat--the children will end up on Facebook or Twitter because that fulfills an actual need to communicate with other people. But some of them will find other uses for it and some of them will become interested in how they work.
Reminded me of an old joke:
"I want to die like my father did, in his sleep. Not screaming in terror like the passengers in his car."
at some point someone will have a heart attack while being driven in an autonomous car
There's a macabre thought.
So I'm driving to see the grandkids. I have a heart attack in route and die. And the car dutifully delivers my dead body to the grandkids.
Eww...
This is actually an interesting point.
If you'll excuse the analogy, I like to eat meat, but I don't really want to know about the slaughterhouse. One could easily argue that one of the things that killed the Space Shuttle was that it made access to LEO too easy, too mundane, too boring. Most of us are interested in the end-result of science--the part where it gets turned into something useful to our every day lives or helps us in extraordinary ways. We don't want to know about the years of research and development that were done to give us the technology we have today. We'll just use it.
Science is, by and large, boring to most people. We don't want to know about it. We just want the results.
Swipping [sic] makes sense when it's part of the display and you touch what you see, otherwise not so much.
My Mac's trackpad disagrees with you.
...out of how many total motorists?
Look, I can point my fingers at cars and cyclists. The whole argument is just stupid. Yes, cars break the rules. Yes, bicyclists break the rules. Does this solve any problem? No. It's just a whine of "You're picking on me!! It's not fair!!"
The issue that I have with cyclists isn't that they break the law--everybody does it. It's just that cyclists believe they shouldn't have to obey them.
There was an incident I read about recently where, due to local complaints, the police hung out around a stop sign and ticketed road users who did not come to a complete stop. They busted a half-dozen car drivers and around 2 dozen bicyclists.
The car drivers paid their tickets. The bicyclists raised a ruckus about how it wasn't fair and the police were targeting them and it wasn't right and they shouldn't have to pay a ticket for driving through a stop sign and the police should be out solving real crimes and not wasting time on bicyclists not stopping at stop signs and bicycling saves the environment and gives exercise and they shouldn't be getting tickets for doing that and everybody is picking on them and it's just not fair!!
Look, a driver in a car is protected by several tons of government-mandated safety equipment. You're not. It's in your interest to follow the traffic laws. If I'm driving a car, run a red light, and I'm broadsided by another car, there's a good chance I'll survive. If I'm bicycling, run a red light, and I'm broadsided by a car, I'm probably dead. So the solution is not to somehow expect a car to stop when I run a red light. The solution is don't run a red light!
That's actually a really clever idea! A pity it's been done--it was called "The Space Shuttle." Perhaps you heard of it.
The Space Shuttle was, essentially, a launch-able space station. It supported 7 astronauts in a shirt-sleeve environment. Experiments were carried out inside and outside the shuttle.
The issue was that the Shuttle could only stay up about 3 weeks or so. The advantage of the ISS is that it stays up much longer, allowing for longer-term experiments.
Thus, if you are a politician, and want pork [...]
But you repeat yourself.
It's not as common as red-green, but blue-yellow colorblindness exists. Yellow will appear as either a violet or light grey.
Then you will also need to ban Cyclists [...]
Not all cyclists. Just people on fixies. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing...
...and sometimes it passed back and forth a couple of times.
Apple added aliases to System 7 (essentially symbolic links, though a little more clever). Visually, the way you could tell an alias from the real file is that it's name was in italics. So the filename under the icon would say "Microsoft Word" instead of "Microsoft Word". It was a clever idea.
Unfortunately, it didn't work all that well with non-roman characters. There's no Italic in Japanese. So you couldn't tell them apart.
Microsoft implemented shortcuts in Windows 95 (essentially symbolic links--not a little more clever). But, visually, you'd see a little arrow badge in the lower right corner of the icon letting you know this was a shortcut to some other file.
I think System 7.5 or 7.6 fixed it so you got both the italics and the little arrow badge, so Japanese users could now tell what was an alias and what wasn't.
As I see it, it has to do with the order in which things occur.
If I say we should, oh, cancel the H1-B program and you agree with me, you could donate to my campaign. "Free speech." If you say, "I'll give you money to cancel the H1-B program" and I accept it, that's bribery.
The government, in its infinite wisdom, screwed up some testing on the moon and managed to split its surface [...]
Or maybe it was a runaway planet?
To the Moon, Kristian! To the Moon!
Apple was going under in the 90s. Then Microsoft bailed them out to avoid anti-trust problems.
That's not entirely accurate...
Apple did have a fair amount of cash on their books in the 90s (that was part of what inspired the famous Michael Dell quote about shutting down the company and giving the cash back to the shareholders). Microsoft's "bail-out," though, was more about press than about money. $150 million wasn't that much.
You're right that Apple was going under in the 90s. Why? Because everybody said so. And if you're dealing with a company that's going under, do you really want to float them credit? As I understand it, even Motorola was basically making them pay cash for CPUs. Nobody wanted to be left holding the bag.
That makes it difficult to operate.
Apple didn't necessarily need money--again, they had quite a bit. What they needed was a vote of confidence. The agreement with Microsoft provided that vote of confidence that Apple wasn't going to go out of business.
Well, Google had tackling.
I think the complaint isn't, "This shouldn't be on the air!" but a "I should have some idea of what is going to be shown!"
Not necessarily unreasonable.
Pretty much everything on HBO has a Content Rating. Note that they mention "Strong Sexual Content" and I'm sure Game of Thrones triggers that.
The complaint, I suppose, is that they don't have a category for "Depravity."
Just make sure you have an manual override for the automated manual control.
I don't think latency is a real issue for text mode.
It's simple to do, and as a bonus the voices stop.
Maybe for you. But my neighbor's dog just won't shut up, no matter what kind of hat I wear...
Not sure on that. Remember that ADA concerns disabilities, not illnesses. Since it's the government, I'd be surprised if a list of disabilities isn't somehow defined and that you can't just claim something as a "disability."
For example, if I have Metallophobia (fear of metal), the company does not have to remove all metal from my surroundings.
Well, there's an "environment" everywhere. It may not necessarily be one you'd like to live in, but that doesn't mean it's not an "environment."
For example, I'd imagine you have lots of snakes and lizards in West Texas. They like hot weather--or, more precisely, hot things. So we cover the desert with solar panels and what happens to the snakes and lizards?
I'll grant you, this is Texas, so the answer is, "Who cares?"