Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:I don't believe it (Score 1) 507

I don't either. Since I bought an App last night on a jailbroken iPhone.

But seriously, do they actually want to discourage buying apps legitimately? That would be the one thing that makes me sell my iPhone. I did it for use on alternate carrier, I like having the categories, and wallpapers.

Comment Re:You are delusional. (Score 1) 391

I dunno, McCain hasn't been very supportive this year or in the past. He voted no on restoring the already cut funding, and has listed 2 NASA projects that were given a boost from stimulus money as pork projects. This included non HSF projects.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00340
http://mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=41c9dff7-2318-4777-ab6a-73a0841cefe0

Will Obama be any better? I don't have my hopes up since when he was campaigning he had on his website delaying CxP for funding education. Only time will tell I suppose.

Comment Re:New Heavy Lift Vehicle - From TFA (Score 2) 391

My guess is inline shuttle derived (Direct, Ares V classic, Ares IV\Ares V lite) or (hopefully not) shuttle side mount.

FTA:

The new program would jettison Ares 1. To appease congressional critics like Shelby, the Administration hopes to ensure that research and development work on the new rocket would proceed without significant job losses at NASA centers like Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama."

Doesn't sound like SpaceX to me.

Comment Re:Why is this a surprise? Obama hates space. (Score 1) 200

Yep, Obama originally said take away from CxP to fund education. He then changed his tune when he gave his speech in florida. ( My thought is why the hell would those two compete for budget when they compliment each other so well. )

McCain is no better, he recently voted No in restoring funding that NASA has already lost. It passed anyways.

Comment Cuts not for certian. (Score 1) 200

It would be sad and somewhat hypocritical (watch the video) of Obama to kill off the Shuttle's successor. However, keep in mind that these are rumors stir from a blanket statement applied to all agencies.

FTA:

But a senior administration official, who is not authorized to speak on the record, cautioned not to read too much into the proposed reductions. The official said agencies were given "global" instructions to cut their budgets by 5 to 10 percent to help reduce the record $1.4 trillion deficit.

"When the president makes a decision on human spaceflight, he can ignore that," said the official.

Comment Re:eh (Score 1) 452

Stephen Hawking Wrote:

Going into space won't be cheap, but it will take only a small proportion of world resources. NASA's budget has remained roughly constant in real terms since the timeof the Apollo landings, but it has decreased from .3 percent of U.S. GDP in 1970 to .12 percent now.-Even if we were to increase the international budget 20 times to make a serious effort to go into space, it would only be a small fraction of world GDP

There will be those who argue that it would be better to spend our money solving the problems of this planet, like climate change and pollution, rather than wasting it on a possibly fruitless search for a new planet. I am not denying the importance of fighting climate change and global warming, but we can do that and still spare a quarter of a percent of world GDP for space.-Isn't our future worth a quarter of percent?"

Comment Re:At this point in US history (Score 2, Informative) 917

Stephen Hawking Wrote:

Going into space won't be cheap, but it will take only a small proportion of world resources. NASA's budget has remained roughly constant in real terms since the timeof the Apollo landings, but it has decreased from .3 percent of U.S. GDP in 1970 to .12 percent now.-Even if we were to increase the international budget 20 times to make a serious effort to go into space, it would only be a small fraction of world GDP

There will be those who argue that it would be better to spend our money solving the problems of this planet, like climate change and pollution, rather than wasting it on a possibly fruitless search for a new planet. I am not denying the importance of fighting climate change and global warming, but we can do that and still spare a quarter of a percent of world GDP for space.-Isn't our future worth a quarter of percent?"

Replace climate change and global warning with any of the issues you listed and this still applies.

Comment Re:Dragon Orion (Score 1) 137

Agreed on it not being a showstopper for Dragon in general, I just don't see as a replacement for Lockheed's Orion (personal opinion there - I'll admit I'm probably biased since I work on Orion). There *could* be reason's that it can't be beefed up however, such and added weight, mass etc becoming too much for its launch vehicle. But that's not to say that it can't be upgraded at all.

Also agreed that I haven't seen anyone *respectable* propose "Space-X is our only hope" either. I mostly see these comments online packaged with more doom and gloom for NASA and Constellation. And with Space-X's performance record, I don't see why Orbital (per se, they aren't perfect either) doesn't get all the hype.

As far as commercial LEO transportation, I'm pretty much all for it. Constellation is meant for exploration in my eyes. And the longer we keep shuttle, the more money is drained from CxP.

The question I ask is: Once we choose these "commercial" launch companies, do they become just another contractor in bed with NASA, with cost increases, heavy oversight, and get flamed like LM, Boeing, etc frequently are?

Comment Re:Dragon Orion (Score 1) 137

IIRC, the Dragon cannot handle a re-entry from straight from the moon. It just isnt built for it. Plus there is this snippet for the article you linked too:

On August 18, 2006, NASA announced that SpaceX had been chosen, along with Kistler Aerospace, to develop crew and cargo launch services for the International Space Station. The plan using SpaceX's Dragon capsule calls for demonstration flights between 2008 and 2010. SpaceX may receive up to $278 million if they meet all NASA milestones. Kistler failed to meet its obligations with NASA, and its contract was terminated in 2007.[4][5][6] NASA decided to re-award its contract after a competition.[7] On February 19, 2008 NASA announced that it had chosen Orbital Sciences as the new winner.[8]

I don't fully understand the Space-X hype. They don't have a good record at all really. Why does everyone want to trust the entire future of manned spaceflight to this one particular group?

Comment Re:Wireless? You've already ruled me out (Score 1) 569

I shared your view on wireless until I got a Logitech VX nano. Uses two AAA batteries and I replace them maybe twice a year, while never turning it off either. Its for notebooks really, but I just dock my laptop and can use the mouse comfortably setting at my desk. I actually prefer it now to my big ol' MX series gaming mouse.

http://www.amazon.com/Logitech-Cordless-Laser-Mouse-Notebooks/dp/B000TKHBDK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1247188712&sr=8-1

Slashdot Top Deals

Intel CPUs are not defective, they just act that way. -- Henry Spencer

Working...