"I can't imagine how demoralizing it is to spend years working on a project that would ultimately succeed"

None of NASA's major manned spaced projects are even remotely likely to succeed, they are not intended to do so any more. They are just a place to blow money, create jobs and put money in Lockheed and Boeing pockets. More importantly they buy votes in the critical swing state of Florida.

They are designed to run 4-8 years, produce nothing except votes, paychecks and contractor profits, then they get cancelled and start over. It is way easier and less risk than actually making anything that will fly.

It is not the political process that is broken, it is NASA and the political process.

Get a clue, and spend a few billion on SpaceX to help finish Falcon Heavy. I'm not sure why SLS is even on the table at this point, it isn't remotely competitive.

Lockheed and Boeing also need to be completely removed from the process. They are making a mint milking DOD contracts, they don't need to be in middle of the civilian space program fleecing NASA and taxpayers there too. They do not use money wisely, they devour everything thrown their way and produce as little as possible in return.

http://www.dailymotion.com/vid...

The story about Chernobyl is far from clear. See, for example:

http://unconventionaltravel.co...
http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...

And, in my view most impressive:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffi...

Note that human beings are mammals; so, if other mammals thrive in an area, presumably human being would too (if not excluded by regulations).

What is really sad is that these congressional staffers show suck a lack of professionalism and honor in doing their jobs.

There used to be a time where you could politically disagree with some but still be great friends, or at the very least amicable colleagues. Nowadays, the other political side is just filled with inhuman enemies that need to be degraded and driven into oblivion.

The concept of a government and laws derived from debate and compromise and consideration of different sides of an issue has been wiped out in favor of "I am right and you are wrong, and since you are wrong you can shut the hell up."

So much of this shit looks like stuff a 3rd grader would come up with to insult their enemies.

If everything we do revolves around how much it cost then I'm done.

Good luck.

Math time... $126M loss / $19B revenue = 0.66%, less than one percent loss for a quarter. The company is worth about $140B, so the quarter's drop is less than a tenth of a percent, meaning absorbing a the loss is a tiny decrease in a large bucket. In contrast, the skittish investors yesterday cost the company about $12B compared to the $126M business loss. The skittish investors who cause huge overnight drops like this create opportunities.

We're not talking about a company that is hemorrhaging money. It isn't a company plagued by mismanagement. It is a company that since their first day built a track record of tinkering with models. That is all Amazon has ever done. They have the resources to continue operating when they discover unprofitable ones. It takes money to make money, and many tests and changes cost time and money. Yes, some investors refuse to see the long term and demand a profit every single quarter. Other investors see this as an opportunity to buy or to hold.

Last night they took a 10% drop because short-term investors are skittish. Today you can buy it at a 10% discount; so thanks skittish investors!

Exactly. Lately it seem that companies have become fully intolerant of bad reviews or negative feedback. Their next step is always to demand the person giving the negative feedback recant and seek penance with the company.

This ALWAYS blows up into a huge PR nightmare showing the company to be totally clueless about customer service.

Note to all companies: If you get a bad review, its a clue that your customer service has issues that need to be looked into and addressed. Handling this by apologizing and trying to do better with the next customer or the next interaction with the aggrieved customer is what should be done. Throwing a public temper tantrum is what you should NOT do.

Maybe, maybe not. We know that companies, such as electrical suppliers, have extra equipment lying around for general maintenance and upgrade. Also, the people who manufacture these products have supplies on hand.

While it would be tedious, you would use this spare equipment to repair the most critical connections (from power plant to factories), thus enabling you to begin resupplying everyone else.

I'm not trying to minimize the nightmare scenario of getting things back up and running, only pointing out the path to get us there.

Thus the second part of my statement.

Reading comprehension is your friend.

And yet nothing changes, there is no hardening of infrastructure, no preparation or planning.

ISPs such as Verizon and Comcast would have been forced to upgrade their equipment which means some of the bottlenecks that currently exist wouldn't exist afterwards (though let's be honest, they will find some other excuse to keep speeds slow).

And yes, this is a Broken Window-type fallacy though in this case, it wasn't deliberate.

Also, there would be a temporary boost in productivity and spending as all this equipment, in general, is replaced though whether that would offset the loss of productivity and people having nervous breakdowns because of their Pavlovian need to check their email and texts every ten seconds is debatable.

Aren't these two states, Tennessee and North Carolina, states who routinely harp on federal government interference in states rights?

Now they're asking the federal government to override what their own state governments have said.

Reminds me of Texas where that company blew up because they were storing exorbitant amounts of explosive materials and which had never bothered to be regulated because, you know, regulations are evil. Once the place blew up, Gov. Perry says "Texans take care of their own" then proceeded to whine how their request for federal disaster aid was (initially) rejected.

It would be nice if people had some sort of internal consistency. Either the federal government is too big and needs to stop weedling into state government, or it's not.

I can't wait to hear how those who say there is no need for net neutrality will react to their own states asking for just that.

Also, what type of asshole employee would separate a man from his two young children?

Here's the part most stories won't include about this incident. The father was an A passenger meaning he gets to board first. Southwest also has B and C classifications.

Someone called in to the talk show I was listening who was also an A passenger and explained the complete process. A passengers board first, then B and C. However, since the person had children, despite his A status, he would have boarded between the A and B groups. That is Southwest policy and has been since whenever.

This person attempted to circumvent the established policy by trying to pull a "Do you know who I am?" deal. All he had to do was wait for the A group to board then he could have boarded with his children.

Instead, he was an ass and publicly gave the name of a worker who was doing what company policy was, though she probably should have explained the policy since obviously this guy didn't know, or didn't care, what it was.

So there you have it. Asshole thinks they're someone important and tries to jump the line ends up being shown the door for his stupidity and whininess.

" I think he made a huge mistake in calling out the agent by name on the internet".

So can we all agree that it's wrong, dangerous, and ill-advised to criticize anyone by name on the Internet?

Mr Putin will be very relieved.

Always.