The liquid floating around in the helmet would have eventually drowned him. Doing nothing was 100% certain death; the liquid water was effectively toxic.
Drinking the liquid (which may have been toxic) would have prevented the drowning and provided more time to evacuate him to the interior of ISS. If the liquid were poisonous, medical attention could then be rendered and an evacuation to Earth would be possible.

This is similar to being stranded in the wild: it is always better to drink even smelly water than to die of dehydration. You will most likely be found and returned to civilization before any toxic effect or biological infection from the water you drink would cause any serious health risks. Not drinking could cause your death in a few hours, toxic water would usually take at least a few days to a week to kill you (if you remain untreated).

This of course ignoring the entire question of HOW to drink the water.

If I were NASA I'd take a two-step approach to the issue:

1. Fix the damed leaks.
2. Install a large hydroscopic surface area water/air separator inside the helmet with a straw within reach of the astronaut's mouth. In emergency you can breath through the straw.

Regardless of this issue, it is apparent that the astronauts need an external "man down" signaling device they can activate from muscle memory. The device needs to alert on each of: the comms frequency, visually (flashing light) and on some other dedicated emergency radio frequency with detectors both within the station as well as on Earth.

They ignore obviously risk laden malfunctions and events until someone is killed or put in serious jeopardy in a public manner. If this astronaut had not almost drowned the issue would still be getting ignored.

Time, and time again NASA managers ignore risk and push the "go" mentality. I can't think of a single death or significant injury/risk in the NASA programs where the end result of investigation was "well, it was an unforeseeable accident". Each and every case I recall there were engineers saying "there's a problem we need to fix" and managers just kept ignoring it. From Gemini and Apollo through the SST and now the ISS; this is a disease at the core of NASA that needs to be sterilized.

My TDI VW Golf holds 16gals and gets about 40MPG for 640 mile range. At 75MPH.
The Tesla's range drops to closer to 200 miles at 70MPH. Their web site won't even let you choose 75MPH as a calculation for range; why not?

Funny how Tesla doesn't tell you how many hours they spent actually charging so you can compare it against the driving time. They only fall back to quoting the marketing talking point of "50% charge in 20 minutes" from a super charging station. 75+ minutes to get to 100%.

Let's just ignore that and assume that charging is linear and 1hr from empty to full charge and that a full charge gets you 300 miles(assuming the 80kWh battery option) at 55mph as the Tesla marketing materials claim.

How does a weekend getaway look for a 650 mile drive?

650mi / 55 mph = 12 hours of driving and need 2 charge stops (2 hours)
A total of 14 hours of travel time and an average speed of 46.5mph

If you drive at a more common 70mph** on such a trip instead of the anemic 55mph and your range is 240 miles
650 / 70mph = 9 hours of driving and need 3 charge stops (3 hours)
A total of 12 hours of driving and and average speed of 54mph

**Tesla's web site won't even let you choose 75MPH as a calculation for range despite that being the standard rural speed limit on many Interstate highways.
http://www.teslamotors.com/goe...

Remember: those numbers are the most optimistic range and charging estimates from the Tesla web site. More realistic charge times are about 50% longer if you go to 100% each charge) If you don't have access to a 120kW SuperCharger, don't have the 80kWh battery and don't have the dual onboard charger options then charging times increase significantly. A residential 240V 40A charging station takes 9 hours to charge to 300 miles of range!

Use a gasoline fuel engine based car and you'll spend about 10 minutes refueling. Diesel will probably make the round trip without refueling. A 9 hour trip takes... about 9 hours.

The Tesla S is a nice, all-electric short distance commuter car. Why can't they just leave it at that and stop trying to prove that you can take cross-country trips with it even when all the most optimistic numbers say it just doesn't work unless you don't care when you get to your destination?

No, Slashdot is Frankenstein's monster.

There is much wrong with this article.
Geeks today aren't what they used to be.

Not the cobbled together monster!

No, #2 excludes them from the offence

Most laws are written such that the monitor needs to be able to receive and/or send content. GPS doesn't receive or send content and can only use the data within itself. Legally it is the same as a paper map as a "driver aid"
As soon as your device can communicate you fall under these laws. Using your iPhone for nav could get you nabbed as it can send/receive data.

All the officers in the Phoenix metro area are on BMW or Honda bikes. Mostly BMW. Small, fast, maneuverable and reliable.

Minor correction:
You do need a payment method to open the iTunes Store account. After 24 hours you may remove the payment method from the account, but the CC is a form of identity and age verification in the process.

The settlement is regarding in-app purchases, not App purchases.

Here's why there's not automatic 15 minute window to get refunds for those: Apple has not way of knowing if you USED the in-app purchase or not.

Why's it matter? You're playing a game and need Sword of Wonderment +5 to kill Malchan. You can in-app purchase it for $1.29 or go spend an hour earning it in a quest. You're lazy so you buy the Sword of Wonderment +5, kill Malchan and then claim a refund for the $1.29 you spent on the Sword of Wonderment +5.
Substitute bags of coins, bigger engine, red sneakers or any other item in any other game that does this sort of thing.

In that environment, what is the incentive for developers to continue to offer free or low-cost games?

Babies are united in the idea that once they get a lollypop, that lollypop should not be taken away from them. Try and there will be screaming.
Remember: ever time a baby looses a lollypop, the terrorists win.

What I'm talking about is that this isn't a gun control issue. This, like so many shootings before it, is a mental health issue.

People jumped all over the NYT for saying this was raising the debate over cellphone use in theaters. People started calling that stupid as it was "obvious" that this was really a gun control debate.
I'm saying both those camps are stupid: This is raises the bar of the discussion of the failed healthcare system in this country. When we have a population that can snap so easily as to kill another person over such a minor incident: we need to get our heads straightened out.

Well the duty of a police officer is generally: to protect and serve. What most people don't understand is that they don't protect and serve the people individually, the police protect and serve the laws and institutions of the government of their jurisdiction.
The police are there to help the government maintain control of the society as the laws define it. Generally that means the police show up after crimes or other offenses, gather evidence, arrest suspects and present them to the prosecuting attourney for prosecution/trial; or cite them for a civil infraction. The police have no legal responsibility to protect you, or me, as a an individual person.

My point about the shooter is that he started complaining to the texting guy, apparently because the texting process was bothering/interrupting his enjoyment of what was on the screen. If the shooter was truly interested in seeing the presentation then his best course of action would have been to wait for the texting to stop, relocate or wait for a theater employee to resolve the situation. If his goal was to see a film then discharging a firearm in the theater was diametrically opposed to his interests.
People don't, in a rational mindset, act in anything other their own self interest.
Mark my words: we're going to find out this guy had some mental/psychological issues that triggered this incident.