Suborbital flights are a great way to travel in planes, but there are a lot of technical problems to re-entry from suborbital planes, under control.

This is a very novel way to do it and deserves further research, frankly.

No they didn't.

It was widely believed that materials were not strong/light enough to build a practical plane that wasn't more than a toy (and they weren't until the wide use of aluminum, which wasn't available then).

And suborbital flights are the BEST way to fly between continents. Research that goes this direction is good.

Neither did planes, when the Wright brothers flew one down a beach.

It was a glorified and deadly kite. Hundreds of people died thrillseeking in planes before they were ever used commercially.

Learning for the sake of thrills is still learning.

But.... they could have died.

gasp

To be fair, the first thousand or so airplanes were entirely for "thrill seeking" purposes. There was no practical use at the time. Over 100 people died in plane crashes before there was any practical use for them.

The people at the time couldn't have envisioned wars and modern transportation being entirely dictated by aircraft.

Now, suborbital flights are potentially the future of intercontinental travel.

Why are we so averse to risk these days? I think it's a serious cultural flaw.

Very few cars made since 1988 do not rely on a single computer (or a group of computers) to run properly.

If you have a problem with computer-controlled cars, you need to keep your 1944 Ford running.

I suspect that will be addressed in the near future.

In the short term, I am OK with gas cars subsidizing electric cars if it encourages more EV powertrain development.

Wait, what?

The entire body is built in a different way. The primary body components are a "sled" with the powertrain and battery packs. This rigid sled makes the vehicle's center of gravity substantially lower than any other vehicle and makes the passenger compartment substantially more rigid. Both of these things result in a much higher safety than any other vehicle on the road.

Second, the vehicle is entirely drive-by-wire, which may scare the luddites, but is really the future of automotive technology.

Third, it's not only the fastest accelerating production care EVER built for under $1 million (and it only costs $95k in that config), but it also had the single highest rating ever given out by "Consumer Reports", last year, beating every single Mercedes, BMW, Audi, Ferrari, Cadillac, etc in their metrics (drivability, comfort, quality, performance, style).

http://money.cnn.com/2013/05/0...

It also received the highest rating ever given to any car by Car & Driver magazine.

It beats the 7-series BMW and the Jaguar S-Type and the Audi A8 on a level playing field.

"a Ford Fusion"

LOL

If you can identify a KKK-like group that is systematically threatening women, by all means, lets go stop them.

If not, i'm confused what the analogy is.

I don't even know anything about the case you're talking about and I don't care to read about it, but I will say that I address all unsupported accusations, whether from a man, woman, child, monkey, dolphin or all-knowing sky fairy... with a grain of salt and a query to show me the evidence.

A large chunk of crimes reported are false reports. It's not a majority, but it's enough to be scary and justify investigating all accusations carefully.

Just making sure you're aware that the ice caps are dry ice (CO2), not water.

Citation needed. What is the partial pressure of CO2 on Mars? I'm under the impression it's around 0.05% of Earth. A large gas extraction facility would be required to collect enough CO2 to provide for a modest greenhouse.

I also am under the impression that our best guess is that water is a trace element on Mars. Sure, large scale industrial mining operations could turn up a measurable quantity of water, but I don't think that it's as simple as melting some snow.

That's the thing about IT. Almost all of the best IT people and technologists are self-taught, usually beginning in their teens.

So, if there is a gender diversity issue here, it comes even before finishing University. Possibly even before STARTING University.

I applaud efforts to balance opportunities for everyone, honestly. But I shy away from those efforts that take the form of "giving special treatment to xx group".

It's disheartening to see that approaching 65% of University applicants are now female. IT is an isolated area where there is a huge disparity, but it isn't too much different from other fields, such as education, where it is 80% female. That certainly is a field where there is active discrimination going on, in the other direction.

But placing the blame on IT shops and their hiring managers is misguided and wrong. There are fundamental demographic issues that can't be addressed by short-term fixes and "diversity hiring" programs.

I'd say it's pretty much the same now.

But I'm hiring right now. I have 117 resumes on my desk. 116 are males, as best I can tell.

I'm someone who really dislikes affirmative action and "gender equalization", but I wholly support Google's approach here. It's rational and sane, and totally reasonable.