I remember Firefox being FAST like it was on FIRE!!
Now I click on the icon and wait a good minute or so for it to load.
If I accidentally close it and try to re-open it I get a message saying to wait for the program to completely close, which takes a good minute or so also.
In space you do not want to go down any unnecessary gravity wells. As such I would describe the moon base as a destination, not a place to prep for a trip to Mars. We can and should test out technology we plan to go to Mars with on the Moon, but we shouldn't build a craft on the moon to go to Mars.
Many people don't give a shit about exploration if there is no human present.
Yea the rovers have been a great success and they have some more in the works, but if we don't land boots on the ground the thought is that we did nothing.
It's not graft-driven government corruption, it's a ratings gimmick. If the majority of Americans start giving a shit about exploration then there will be more pressure on congress to fund NASA better. At this time most people just plain don't give a shit so NASA's budget is getting diminished.
You will need approximately half an acre per human just for food, a very very large amount of solar panels and/or a nuclear reactor as well as room for all the supplies the astronauts would need on the journey there. You would end up with a ship the size of a small town. Now I won't say that landing a ship the size of a small town on Mars is impossible, but it is improbable.
That is actually cheaper than coming up with a return vehicle and the fuel for it. By sending one-way, it gives them time to build a base out while doing research on the planet.
For efficiencies sake it would be best to have it built before humans land. The base will not be just for shelter, it will be for oxygen, electricity, and food production also.
Besides that the astronauts would require shelter while building their shelter the amount of food and supplies necessary to keep the astronauts alive while they built their habitat would exceed the cost of building a base with robots before they got there.
That would throw off calculations regarding the conversion of mass to energy.
I have always wondered how in the hell is the ratio of mass to energy exactly the speed of light squared? I don't quite see why they should be related, but the fact that they are should say something.
Although this experiment may or may not be expensive, but further experiments will certainly be.
I would imagine that further testing would require greater distances. Current test is at 732 kilometers, the radius of the Earth is around 6400 kilometers, if we want to test further than that we will have to launch a target into space.
Cheap and simple structures have been developed for thousands of years, the world has cheap and simple structures down pat.
Tents, teepees, igloos, long houses, lean twos, tar paper shacks, wigwams, the list of cheap and simple structure designs goes on and on.
If there is to be any progress in structure designs then we want to go complex and expensive. And perhaps some technology that is developed for complex and expensive structures may just work their way down also to the cheap and simple designs.
I am not the most well versed in these topics, but I think it is surprising that they have detected a planet that orbits two stars.
With a regular star system planets orbit a single point, extremely easy to figure out and therefor rather obvious, with a binary system how do the planets maintain their orbits with the gravity fluctuating as the stars orbit each other?
Example, I used to work in shipping at Dell, we had to walk though metal detectors to leave work everyday. We were also required to wear steel toe shoes, therefor the metal detectors always went off. People were stealing shit right and left because they knew that security was ineffective.
Slashdot Mirror
Running on my work computer. XP, 2.9ghz dual core, and 2 gigs of ram. It is slow, very very slow.
I remember Firefox being FAST like it was on FIRE!!
Now I click on the icon and wait a good minute or so for it to load.
If I accidentally close it and try to re-open it I get a message saying to wait for the program to completely close, which takes a good minute or so also.
Was expecting this classic.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHzdsFiBbFc
Do you believe it would be better if Apple won?
And neither was JFK, what's your point?
In space you do not want to go down any unnecessary gravity wells. As such I would describe the moon base as a destination, not a place to prep for a trip to Mars. We can and should test out technology we plan to go to Mars with on the Moon, but we shouldn't build a craft on the moon to go to Mars.
Many people don't give a shit about exploration if there is no human present.
Yea the rovers have been a great success and they have some more in the works, but if we don't land boots on the ground the thought is that we did nothing.
It's not graft-driven government corruption, it's a ratings gimmick. If the majority of Americans start giving a shit about exploration then there will be more pressure on congress to fund NASA better. At this time most people just plain don't give a shit so NASA's budget is getting diminished.
You will need approximately half an acre per human just for food, a very very large amount of solar panels and/or a nuclear reactor as well as room for all the supplies the astronauts would need on the journey there. You would end up with a ship the size of a small town. Now I won't say that landing a ship the size of a small town on Mars is impossible, but it is improbable.
That is actually cheaper than coming up with a return vehicle and the fuel for it. By sending one-way, it gives them time to build a base out while doing research on the planet.
For efficiencies sake it would be best to have it built before humans land. The base will not be just for shelter, it will be for oxygen, electricity, and food production also.
Besides that the astronauts would require shelter while building their shelter the amount of food and supplies necessary to keep the astronauts alive while they built their habitat would exceed the cost of building a base with robots before they got there.
The theory is that this is caused by an enlargement of the optic nerve. Lasik would not help in this case.
That would throw off calculations regarding the conversion of mass to energy.
I have always wondered how in the hell is the ratio of mass to energy exactly the speed of light squared? I don't quite see why they should be related, but the fact that they are should say something.
Although this experiment may or may not be expensive, but further experiments will certainly be.
I would imagine that further testing would require greater distances. Current test is at 732 kilometers, the radius of the Earth is around 6400 kilometers, if we want to test further than that we will have to launch a target into space.
I expected to have the full two weeks of training to goof off.
Squids aren't so much bisexual, more like rapesexual.
The Borg face has to do with windows, that is a borgified Bill Gates.
It's due for a replacement.
Cheap and simple structures have been developed for thousands of years, the world has cheap and simple structures down pat.
Tents, teepees, igloos, long houses, lean twos, tar paper shacks, wigwams, the list of cheap and simple structure designs goes on and on.
If there is to be any progress in structure designs then we want to go complex and expensive. And perhaps some technology that is developed for complex and expensive structures may just work their way down also to the cheap and simple designs.
I am not the most well versed in these topics, but I think it is surprising that they have detected a planet that orbits two stars.
With a regular star system planets orbit a single point, extremely easy to figure out and therefor rather obvious, with a binary system how do the planets maintain their orbits with the gravity fluctuating as the stars orbit each other?
Security Theater is not effective.
Example, I used to work in shipping at Dell, we had to walk though metal detectors to leave work everyday. We were also required to wear steel toe shoes, therefor the metal detectors always went off. People were stealing shit right and left because they knew that security was ineffective.
Too expensive to monitor and it is kinda hard to tell what website someone is on via a camera that is looking over their shoulder.
My android phone has wifi calling, thought that was a standard feature.
Still uses minutes though.
That would be inconvenient for them, it is so much easier for them, and they get more acceptance if they just don't bother to ask in the first place.
They have forgotten to ask if it is right. Does that make them evil, or just lazy?
Perhaps I should RTFA, but do they track hidden SSID's?
If not, there is your opt out.
I don't have those problems, could it be that you may be the reason that your phone is doing all that?
Wait... I got it! It's the SUV of electronic gadgets!! ^^
I'd say it's the Smart Car of electronic gadgets.
That is no excuse to allow even less competition.
All it means is that the DOJ should also be looking at the competition between cable providers.
Two wrongs do not make a right.