Close, but not what I need - I need something to give my brain some memory!

While I'm all for the governments embracing modern tools and technology, developing an app for a selected brand of phones to help motorcyclists - that's just ridiculous.

TFA makes a point that "It's very likely that not all of the government's iPhone apps were well-conceived -- but neither are all of the private sector apps in the App Store". But the private ones are not funded with our tax money! It's alarming that the author does not see the difference. Let private parties make ridiculously absurd applications that only two people in the world have use for. Let them make apps that NO-ONE needs or wants. But the government does not have this liberty, the government does not have any of its own money or resources.

If there is demand for an app that acts as a warning light for motorists, let someone make and sell it, let people compete for whose is the best.

Dear government, you are (almost) always ineffective and always expensive. Please remember that and stick with doing your real job.

It is always so exciting to watch the launch. I find the Shuttle very aesthetic, one of the most beautiful pieces of technology, its shape is more appealing than airplanes. I will be sad to see them go. My favorite is Discovery; she flew both of the "return-to-flight" mission and for some reason seems to be the leader of the pack. :) But Atlantis also has an impressive record, it will be retirement well deserved.

From NASA.gov: "Atlantis lifted off on its maiden voyage on Oct. 3, 1985, on mission 51-J. Later missions included the launch of the Magellan probe to Venus on STS-30 in May 1989, Galileo interplanetary probe to Jupiter on STS-34 in October 1989, the first shuttle docking to the Mir Space Station on STS-71 in June1995 and the final Hubble servicing mission on STS-125 in May 2009. Atlantis is named after a two-masted sailing ship that was operated for the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute from 1930 to 1966. STS-132 is Atlantis’ 32nd flight and its 11th flight Shuttle Atlantis to the station"

What? How does the chase for more megapixels in your Nth generation iPhone help Africa? How does this decadence we now live help those living in poverty? How did you come to the conclusion that by "concerned with comfort and entertainment" I meant feeding or helping the poor or that I would ever object to that?

But coming back to the merit - the emphasis on applied research has caused humans to lose the drive to move towards greater goals. Without trying to reach for the stars (figuratively speaking now) there will be no cheaper and better medicines or better fertilizers for Africa. In medicine, we still reap the benefits of basic research from the seventies. I bet those guys heard their own share of "why don't you do something useful instead?" in their days.

"my-rocket-car-is-bigger-than-your-rocket-car nonsense" is exactly what I was objecting to. It's what we have today.

It is very sad that the two records come from 1969 and 1974. We have not been keeping the pace for quite some time. We used to have civilian supersonic jets, we used to be able to go to the Moon, we are about to lose the shuttle... Humankind is more concerned with comfort and entertainment these days.

While I see you point, I have to disagree. In your extreme logic noone can ever be forced to do anything. Because when it comes to it, you can always refuse (and die).

My friend is a very skilled surgeon - which may be one of the reasons why he feels that hands-on would be better in many cases. And he's not "doing nothing". He's an out-spoken critic and opponent of overuse of the technology and he's actually trying fairly hard to overturn the hospital's decision. Admittedly, not to the point of losig his job.

I applaud your life if you really have the clear consciousness to call people who make compromises cowards.

That's a valid point. Also, every technology - and medicine is no different in this - has it's phase of enthusiastic adoption, eventual disappointment when it's found out it's not as good as previously hoped, and then a phase of rational use in indications where it makes sense. I remember the time when surgeons would do 6-hour laparoscopies because it was IN. Later they realized that a 2-hour open surgery is actually better for the patient and laparoscopies were limited to cases where they make sense.

I am a doctor in a university hospital and I recently went out to have beer with a friend of mine from the urology department. He's the chief "robot operator" for our hospital and he hates the machine with a vengence. No only are the operations several times more expensive (and longer), but to get the money they paid for the machine back, the hospital forces him to use the robot even on cases that would be much better done hands-on. Patients with more complications and longer hospital stay are no exceptions. To me this still seems like a technology we are yet to learn to use properly. Use it for remote operations where the surgeon is not physically available, use it in indications where it makes sense, but don't believe in all-saving robotic future of surgery. It's not here yet. The adoption cycle of many older technologies should serve as a warning.

This only works provided that you know how much gallon is (I don't), you use miles (I don't) and you drive about 12,220 miles a year (I certainly don't). :)

Using 100 km is actually quite nice when you need to calculate the cost of driving somewhere, since it's easy to express the journey in some kind of multiple/fraction of 100 km, multiply by fuel consumption (which is a small number; in the case of my car it is conveniently 5 l/100km) and the price/l. So the math is really easy and when I go somewhere with my friends who insist on chipping in for the fuel, I can do the math in my head while parking. :)

Point taken, but you see, the counter does not really update only every 100 km. I bet you don't have to burn a whole gallon to get your reading either, and you don't have to drive for an hour to find out your mph.