I believe YOUR analogy was, "We couldn't do it in the 80's so we can't do it now".

THAT'S stupid.

Especially the Congressional Black Caucus

I've never heard a convincing argument for their position.

The Indiana Law is NOT "The same as what Obama Signed". Not even close. For one thing, the Federal RFRA had Bipartisan support. The Indiana RFRA was voted STRICTLY on Party Lines (guess which Party?).

Context matters. This is what I was responding to and clearly he seems to suggest that because the vote was not bi-partisan, then it is not like the Federal law. The margin by which it passes does not affect the actual text of the law itself.

...isn't this the guy whose products are built by labor force that is for all intents and purposes, slaves?

Try to get your float promoting Gay Therapy or Traditional Marriage into a Gay Pride Parade.

Groups discriminate all the time. You tolerate some because you agree with them.

So you believe that the intent and text of a law is different depending on who votes for it?

WTF?

So, when the Wright Brothers were building their plane you were standing their telling them it couldn't be done eh?

Just because there isn't off the shelf technology at the moment doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for longer term solutions to interplanetary travel. Regardless of the propulsion system, having electrical power, lots of it, is the difference between coasting from A to B in a tin can vs something that could actually be called a Ship.

*Sigh*...yes. I and everyone else knows that. Thus the "...around the solar system..." comment.

Because I have not pried off my fucking Caps Lock key on this laptop yet.

Back in the 80's I was still running DOS. So, Windows 10 should be impossible now, right?

I am under no illusion that I just miraculously thought of something no one else has.

It's more of a "quit mucking around with chemicals and focus on what has long term potential."

It's time to stop jetting around the solar system on chemical rockets. Designers and funding should be directed towards lofting and running multi-megawatt reactors. They would be used to power multiple ION engines and once at the destination, provide power.

Perhaps. But with Airbus aircraft, the computers are in control and there is no such thing as "manual". And a computer should not allow an aircraft to fly into a mountain.

Is my TFH on too tight?

Feel free to put on the Tin Foil Hat, but something has been bugging me about this whole thing.

It seems to me that one of the many primary directives of a flight control system would be prevent controlled flight into terrain. Knowing where you are, where you are pointed and what's in front of you terrain wise is pretty stand stuff. Airbus planes already actively prevent pilots from doing stupid stuff that could overstress the aircraft. So how was this guy able to "program" a decent into a fucking mountain range? Makes no sense. Either something is off, or someone needs to file one hell of bug report or enhancement request.

And now, thanks to "net neutrality" regulations, these kinds of taxes can be imposed on the U.S. with mere regulation changes.