When I say convoluted I speak in terms of user experience, not the underlying services. Using andLinux is far simpler and more seamlessly integrated than Cygwin is, imo.

I'm not sure I understand the point you're trying to make? While this post makes a good point about andLinux not supporting x64 yet, I'm not sure what your argument against it in favor of Cygwin is. It's not a VM or a dual boot. It runs in tandem with Windows, just like Cygwin, only more seamlessly (imo).

No, I'm sorry. The correct answer is "BeOS."

That's because the original St. Nicholas came from what in the modern day is Turkey.

Why not something less convoluted like andLinux? I used Cygwin when I first started tinkering with Linux when I was young, but there are so many better alternatives at this point I don't understand why it's still around.

Actually the AC above me is right. It's the Final Circle of Paradise, not the Noon, 22nd Century. My bad, sorry.

    And so the profit saith, "Learn and love the multiverse as we know it, for there is more to learn and love, in all it's wonder and splendor."

    I hear a storm coming. I think Thor may be aiming a lightning bolt at me for some reason. :)

   

Pen and paper analysis may not find out all the issues. We had a weird one that flummoxed a bunch of network engineers. It was an IOS upgrade to the built in fiber bridge on a blade server. The old IOS worked fine, the new one worked until you tried to jumpstart a blade. Jumpstarts worked fine with the old IOS but not on the new one. As we rarely jumpstarted the blades, this issue was not caught until after the bridges on all the blade servers were upgraded.

Um, yes, which is why those were separate sentences. I didn't imply they were 100x as efficient -- at least in terms of insolation conversion. They are, however, supposedly 100x efficient in terms of material used.

But, you seem to be ignoring the issue I tried to raise: if the costs of materials is irrelevant, then 100x lower material costs isn't interesting. No one has claimed that the retail costs for generating X amount of energy will be 100x less, and since, as I posited, the materials costs are not anywhere near a determining factor for retail costs, an advancement of 100x isn't interesting.

Now, really, tell me something new. Convince me that this isn't anything more than a blowhard PR agent earning his keep. I would love to be proved wrong.

oxygen is abundant. It's a byproduct of the fusion process in stars. It's usually found in oxides and can be found in large quantities there. If you have solar power available in quantity, you can break down the water or silicates or metal oxides to produce the raw metals and all the oxygen you could need.

700,000,000,000 *1
  / 100,000 *2
  / 452,000 *3
gives,
15 *4

  15 years of a $100,000 job would really turn things around for this country. It would allow them (including myself) to probably buy that house instead of renting that they have been wanting to. But right now, they are out of work. They could also buy the car that they need. (Even a green efficient one!) We wouldn't need to raise taxes either; anyone who tells you so is either a liar, or under a delusion. Doing the (simple) math just now has told me that Obama, and the whole entire government has sold us out to the bankers and to whoever ultimately controls them.

*1 - Seven hundred billion in bailouts which may be conservative as a Google search of "Total cost of bank bailouts" gives links indicating up to 4 trillion in Jan. and up to 23.7 trillion in July.

*2 - One hundred thousand dollars, which is a comfortable salary anywhere in America, or should be.

*3 - Four hundred and fifty two thousand reported 9 hours ago are unemployed right now according to Google search (news).

*4 - Fifteen years is how long the currently unemployed could be paid one hundred thousand dollars a year.

Yeah, and the costs are exactly on the same level, and the launch frequency probably has nothing to do how much government gives budget.

This sounds like a good working idea.

Upside Down Flint Rubble Bubble Cake

1/2 cup sugar

1/2 cup dark brown sugar

1/4lb (8tbl) butter

4 cups (18oz) unbleached all purpose flour

1/2 cup milk

2tbl Flint

1.5 tsp baking powder

2 eggs

Preheat oven to 350.

Cream butter and sugar. Stir in eggs. Add half of the flour, mix. Add half of the milk, mix. Add the other half of the flour, then the other half of the milk. Fold in the flint and pour into your favorite upside down cake pan. Blow bubbles into the mixture with a straw. Bake for 45 min or until a toothpick inserted into the cake comes out clean. Let cool upside down for at least one hour before removing from the mold.

Perhaps I'm daft, but where in that Wikipedia article does it state 110km (or any length, for that matter)?

There is a problem with people who have chronic, recurring problems. The thing is, at that point that person is essentially a charity case - whether it's charity through higher premiums everyone else pays or through a government mandate, they are someone who costs more to keep alive than they will produce with their life. The insurance model breaks down.

Are you actually arguing that the insurance model breaks down when it tries to do its job: insure something?? That's odd. If it is not possible that a person will take much more than he puts into the fund, we are not talking about insurance, but about investment, a pension fund, or something else. Compare what you just said with liability insurance. For a few dollars per year, one is insured for liabilities that would normally bankrupt an individual. Some people actually will incur this cost, but instead of being bankrupted, they can continue. Everybody else foots the bill. These people take more out of the pot than they will ever put back. Does the insurance model break down here as well?