No, they didn't do it right, they just chopped the functionality out. This is determined by the launch services database and the LaunchServices framework. The only thing you can use to "set" something using LaunchServices is the function LSSetItemAttribute, which only supports kLSItemQuarantineProperties. There's also stuff like LSSetExtensionHidden, but they didn't add anything for this.

There is no way to programatically influence what application a file should open in when running on Snow Leopard, and there was before. This is a significant loss of functionality. Text files are a great example of this; if I have a set of text files (or even XML) files that I like to create using with BBEdit because of BBEdit's feature set, I want to open them in BBEdit again. I don't want to save one, open an info window in the Finder, and select BBEdit from the popup menu, that's just stupid.

If I'm saving PDF compatible files in Illustrator with a .pdf extension, I still want them to open in Illustrator! Not with Preview or Acrobat.

There are only two ways to set a file type in OS X: using a file extension (which is stupid, but supports the lowest common denominator) or HFS+ meta data (which is actually a good idea, because it's file meta data). There's no new extended attribute where you can set a UTI or other attribute that influences launch services other than quarantine (if you happen to find one, run to the top of a very large hill and yell loudly, preferably screaming the name of the attribute; then put a recording of it on YouTube).

Ideally, you'd have more file-system metadata to determine this kind of behaviour, but the "change" popup in the Get Info window only modifies the .DS_Store file next to the file you're inspecting.

The reason would be thinking really long term. As in, on a scale of hundreds, maybe thousands of years.

No, of course sending people to the Moon or Mars will not produce "profit" (in the financial sense) on a scale of years or decades. But in the extreme long term, we'll have new worlds to populate, new planets to colonize.

We can't stay solely on Earth forever.

Sure, but where's the comparison here?

All I see is an AND. Chernobyl and Three Mile Island. TMI didn't hurt anyone and everything was done right, but it's still a situation that's worth avoiding in the future, no?

Daily Productivity Loss I hate you, but not as much as I hate myself.

The slashdot post makes it sound worse than it is. It seems there are 150 firefighters on Mount Wilson the observatory as their highest priority. While mother nature is always unpredictable, we have a large group of skilled people fighting very hard to save it.

We're moving to project constellation with the Ares series of rockets and the Orion space capsule. A 5 year delay doesn't mean we're dropping NASA like a ton of bricks, it just means we're not wasting money keeping the shuttle fleet running when there's a private sector version available. Hopefully it'll be cheaper, but even if it isn't giving the private sector a boost isn't all bad.

Yeah, it's something most Slashdotters haven't heard of called "socializing."

They're not stealing money, they're just asking for it. You guys are the idiots giving to them. I keep my money in my mattress.

Statistically, it's more dangerous to let kids play at a house with a pool than at a house with a gun.

Wow, you're an idiot. It costs much more money to copy a book or a shirt than to just buy a mass produced one. Videogames, and all other non-DRM'd digital media, can be copied in seconds at nearly zero cost.

You have two options: 1) No DRM 2) Ability to return games You can choose only one, and it should be obvious why.

So the fact is, all that's been shown is that people in the know aren't willing to pay for software designed to fuck with their property.

Yeah, but the vast majority of people who download aren't 'in the know', they just want free games. I happen to be both, so even if they removed DRM I'd probably continue pirating games. Realistically, the only way they would be able to stop this majority would be extreme DRM (call home every 5 minutes, requiring internet even for single player games). Removing bad DRM may get a few customers back, but it would get games up on thepiratebay faster, and probably lead to even more people downloading.

Are you being serious? They can put anything they want in the software they're selling, and it's the consumer's choice whether or not to purchase it. There are no parallels with the boston tea party, because nobody is forcing you to buy these games, whereas the unfair taxes were mandatory.

You're a protesting customer when you refuse to buy a game. You become a pirate and a thief when you torrent the game, regardless of your reasoning. Once you do that, corporations have no reason to have faith that you'll go back to lawfully buying their games if they were to remove DRM. Instead, you've shown that you'll go to any length to get the game, and that if they can create secure enough anti-piracy measures they'll get your money.

Because digging a well is obviously much more convenient.