Ah. This is already available on the ISS (It had the functionality very early on). The only reason we've not shipped up giant fuel containers is simply cause we've never needed it. Bits of fuel go up in supply ships though.
The reason you need a shuttle launch to repair the hubble is because the ISS isn't in the same orbit. Moving them around to meet is a a pain the ISS wasn't really designed for that type of mission. And you already are sending up a ship w/ the parts for repair and the people to do the repair... less mess to send them to the hubble directly. (obviously the iss has airlocks, really great manipulator arms and decent amounts of cargo space already so these aren't issues).
There is 100% no use for a refuelling station in space unless we are landing (and leaving) in other gravity wells similar to our own or deeper.
In space fuel and engines used are completely different things from the ones we use leaving a gravity well.
If we are always going to space from earth then there is no need to carry around the giant ass in-atmosphere engines. It is simply a waste of effort. Going to space from here we won't need to keep the engines because we can always attach fresh engines here on earth next departure. And clearly you don't need the engines to land or crash into any heavenly body.
The only time we would need the big in-atmosphere engines to actually make it to space is if we land on and then depart from another planet... One where we don't have large manufacturing plants to attach fresh engines.
So why would we have such a thing set up?
Also, pumping fuel from the earth processing and refining it to ship it up out of earth's deep gravity well seems like a lot of waste (the cost of launch just to make fuel available is very high). IF we are to honestly start landing on other planet/moon's surfaces we need a better system. Perhaps rather than pumping gas from earth we could develop a transport system from Titan..14g (escape velocity of 2.6km/s rather than 11.2km/s). It has lakes of hydrocarbons that we could make usable with little refining (using a robust engine rather than building a large refinery operation may be easier). (I'm aware that the hydrocarbon lakes are near the poles but there IS likely someplace we could get fuel easier than earth)
A possible advantage of getting the fuel off earth would be profit. If economies of scale kick in then it might make economic sense to ship fuel or other materials to earth (if we already have an in space shipping service for the fuel)...
I think that has to do with the 3d era. I mean... When the graphics and characters are less realistic you don't expect the same level of human.. ness. Past laugh scenes didn't have great acting either.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63Zyimc9VAs&fmt=18
As such I will irrationally defend it from insult without weighing the facts. Since I am blinded by the horror that we lose one of our last few news sources on the planet I cannot judge.
PV may eventually become useful but it isn't there yet, and won't be any time soon. Wind power never will unless physics changes which seems rather unlikely. His concise descriptions weren't far off.
Yeah but its hard to see what that will really mean. Money might be more expendable. I heard arrows are being removed from the game.... that costs hunters a lot. So the increased repair costs might mean nothing compared to the savings. And so on....
True. And blizz has stated the same for 2v2/3v3, that they are shooting for 5v5 balance. But that doesn't change the fact that it sucks. I DID say that it isn't an easy issue to fix, if at all possible w/ wow's lvl of complexity.
Top end rogue vs top end anything without a bubble/plate goes like this.
Rogue gets first hit and can keep the target CCed until death. When his target trinkets they will CC again. The target may have the chance to use ONE GCD. That is ALL. For hunters that would likely be disengage. But you will still be slowed by poisons and have a decent chance that you will be stunned in mid air.
A really good rogue will NEVER lose to a hunter in a 1v1. In many/most cases they will not get hit. Their target won't even blow CDs.
Halving repair costs would do that as well. I'm sure bliz can come up with other money sinks. (Would be nice to hear this being true but i've not heard anything.
You can play w/ just the original if you want. And yeah, when cata is released wotlk will probably drop in price. But you would need all the expansions.
Your guess was simply terrible. Not really their fault.
And I don't understand this mentality. Those guys are jerks! Letting us know that a product will be coming out sometime and then we have to WAIT. Why couldn't they have kept it secret from us. Have some control man.
Wow is great.... mostly. Wow has relatively complex fights certain epic battles and great pvp opportunities. Tons of fighting.
The bad really does hurt it though. PVE, is entirely pointless... well not entirely but it is easy to the point of being trivial. The whole PVE experience is hilariously pathetic. I realize I'm speaking more from a good at games POV... since I am a LOT better than the majority of wow players. But I think they pander too much to the terrible players.... And since PVE solo content is pointless you need pve group content at which point you have difficulty finding competent people.
The problem with PVP is balance as always. This is unfortunately really hard to solve. But as it is, the gear treadmill has made PVP sorta silly (rogue in 1v1 = free win). And I think it would be best to give pvpers an 'arena selection' which replaces all gear slots when you go into battle. Which would help balance things a lot. From there, tiered BGs would even out the rest. This would end out-geared people one shotting others, and it would end retards holding back pros.
Also, WG was a cluster fuck. I've no idea why they thought it could be balanced the way they tried, and never fixing it is pathetic. And their algorithm for determining when you get into a group is terrible. And the fact that you cant queue for everything at once is stupid.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah. This is already available on the ISS (It had the functionality very early on). The only reason we've not shipped up giant fuel containers is simply cause we've never needed it. Bits of fuel go up in supply ships though.
The reason you need a shuttle launch to repair the hubble is because the ISS isn't in the same orbit. Moving them around to meet is a a pain the ISS wasn't really designed for that type of mission. And you already are sending up a ship w/ the parts for repair and the people to do the repair... less mess to send them to the hubble directly. (obviously the iss has airlocks, really great manipulator arms and decent amounts of cargo space already so these aren't issues).
If you like British comedy you'd love this show:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNKjShmHw7s
It is a show pretty much mirroring this thread.
If you are in a wifi hotspot 15% of the time it offloads 15% of the 3g usage. Thats the point. 3g is expensive.
http://www.google.com/search?q=recursion
There is 100% no use for a refuelling station in space unless we are landing (and leaving) in other gravity wells similar to our own or deeper.
.14g (escape velocity of 2.6km/s rather than 11.2km/s). It has lakes of hydrocarbons that we could make usable with little refining (using a robust engine rather than building a large refinery operation may be easier). (I'm aware that the hydrocarbon lakes are near the poles but there IS likely someplace we could get fuel easier than earth)
In space fuel and engines used are completely different things from the ones we use leaving a gravity well.
If we are always going to space from earth then there is no need to carry around the giant ass in-atmosphere engines. It is simply a waste of effort. Going to space from here we won't need to keep the engines because we can always attach fresh engines here on earth next departure. And clearly you don't need the engines to land or crash into any heavenly body.
The only time we would need the big in-atmosphere engines to actually make it to space is if we land on and then depart from another planet... One where we don't have large manufacturing plants to attach fresh engines.
So why would we have such a thing set up?
Also, pumping fuel from the earth processing and refining it to ship it up out of earth's deep gravity well seems like a lot of waste (the cost of launch just to make fuel available is very high). IF we are to honestly start landing on other planet/moon's surfaces we need a better system. Perhaps rather than pumping gas from earth we could develop a transport system from Titan.
A possible advantage of getting the fuel off earth would be profit. If economies of scale kick in then it might make economic sense to ship fuel or other materials to earth (if we already have an in space shipping service for the fuel)...
My apologies for rambling.
Ah it was an optional thing. I thought they switched their standard model up to hd dvd to compete. Thats kinda sad.
I think that has to do with the 3d era. I mean ... When the graphics and characters are less realistic you don't expect the same level of human.. ness. Past laugh scenes didn't have great acting either.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63Zyimc9VAs&fmt=18
360 uses hd dvds which hold 30G(dual layer)...
Any word on the use of orbital angular momentum for actual bandwidth at this point?
Erm even if in 2015 prices dropped to $50. They could still say I was one of the first 1000 people in space... Thats pretty badass.
yro gets tagged to anything that might lead to a debate and what is the right thing to do. Sometimes it isn't even something online.
Reuters/AP >>>>>>>>> all other news.
As such I will irrationally defend it from insult without weighing the facts. Since I am blinded by the horror that we lose one of our last few news sources on the planet I cannot judge.
Though your compromise idea isn't bad.
Colour me informed.
Erm for a pool... wouldn't painting the bottom/sides black be cheaper/more effective?
Offtopic: Whats up w/ the rackspace logo?
Pokemon didn't need to be economically viable to sell either....
? Frost mages lose to everything... cept like prot pallies and shit.
PV may eventually become useful but it isn't there yet, and won't be any time soon. Wind power never will unless physics changes which seems rather unlikely. His concise descriptions weren't far off.
Yeah but its hard to see what that will really mean. Money might be more expendable. I heard arrows are being removed from the game.... that costs hunters a lot. So the increased repair costs might mean nothing compared to the savings. And so on....
True. And blizz has stated the same for 2v2/3v3, that they are shooting for 5v5 balance. But that doesn't change the fact that it sucks. I DID say that it isn't an easy issue to fix, if at all possible w/ wow's lvl of complexity.
Top end rogue vs top end anything without a bubble/plate goes like this.
Rogue gets first hit and can keep the target CCed until death. When his target trinkets they will CC again. The target may have the chance to use ONE GCD. That is ALL. For hunters that would likely be disengage. But you will still be slowed by poisons and have a decent chance that you will be stunned in mid air.
A really good rogue will NEVER lose to a hunter in a 1v1. In many/most cases they will not get hit. Their target won't even blow CDs.
Halving repair costs would do that as well. I'm sure bliz can come up with other money sinks. (Would be nice to hear this being true but i've not heard anything.
You can play w/ just the original if you want. And yeah, when cata is released wotlk will probably drop in price. But you would need all the expansions.
Your guess was simply terrible. Not really their fault.
And I don't understand this mentality. Those guys are jerks! Letting us know that a product will be coming out sometime and then we have to WAIT. Why couldn't they have kept it secret from us. Have some control man.
Wow is great.... mostly. Wow has relatively complex fights certain epic battles and great pvp opportunities. Tons of fighting.
The bad really does hurt it though. PVE, is entirely pointless... well not entirely but it is easy to the point of being trivial. The whole PVE experience is hilariously pathetic. I realize I'm speaking more from a good at games POV... since I am a LOT better than the majority of wow players. But I think they pander too much to the terrible players.... And since PVE solo content is pointless you need pve group content at which point you have difficulty finding competent people.
The problem with PVP is balance as always. This is unfortunately really hard to solve. But as it is, the gear treadmill has made PVP sorta silly (rogue in 1v1 = free win). And I think it would be best to give pvpers an 'arena selection' which replaces all gear slots when you go into battle. Which would help balance things a lot. From there, tiered BGs would even out the rest. This would end out-geared people one shotting others, and it would end retards holding back pros.
Also, WG was a cluster fuck. I've no idea why they thought it could be balanced the way they tried, and never fixing it is pathetic. And their algorithm for determining when you get into a group is terrible. And the fact that you cant queue for everything at once is stupid.