The same guy who missed the "/sarcasm" tag at the end of the GP's post?

Finland is a Nordic country, not a Scandinavian one....

He would like to enact budget reforms that take funding decisions away from the Office of Management and Budget and gives them solely to Congress.

And there is the real prize - hidden in plain sight. He wants to usurp the power of the Executive Branch and arrogate it to Congress. But it's for the children!, er, NASA! and so it slides right by most commenters here.

3.) "Why was this allowed?"

Because your typically ERP System SAP & Oracle to name the big to be frail twins does exactly this. It interconnects production, accounting, document maangement, it can control your whole material workflow.
All on the same system.
Yes, this is a weakness

Yes, it's a weakness - but it's also the whole point of having an integrated system in the first place. The armchair sysadmins here on Slashdot keep missing that point... these systems exist for a reason.

Nostalgia blinders are a big issue. TOS wasn't that good. These fan shows do tend to get most of it the same. But it has been close to half century sence TOS.
Of course the big issue that happens is the urge to bring in TNG universe into the mix. There seems to be this crazy attempt to tie cannon together.

Except, the theory is trivially disproved - during the Cretaceous period, the Chicxulub crater and the Deccan traps weren't at each others antipodes.

It's interesting, the asker asks for information about making games and the posters almost universally reply with information about making code. You guys do know these are two completely different activities? (And that computer games are only a small slice of the total gaming universe?)

RTFA. It clearly says that it wasn't all from textbook sales but also from "astute investments". Sounds like the guy worked hard and had his shit together financially.

Use some common sense - unless you have Warren Buffet levels of financial acuity or a great deal of luck, you don't accumulate that much cash via investments unless you start with a pile of cash nearly that size.

The climate is already changing, the goal is to reduce the amount of change.

The problem is the effort is not to reduce the amount, the effort is to send change, however slightly, in a VERY BAD direction.

We already know the Earth will enter a glacial period again. It may even be tending to do so now, we really don't have the understanding of climate to say for sure.

What we do know is that entering a glacial period is something we would vastly rather avoid over any of the climate warming models to date (now that we know runaway warming is simply not going to happen as the doomsayers predicted). Glacial periods will mean mass extinctions all over, and a huge shortage of arable land unlike the greatly expanded land that can be used for agriculture in a warmer Earth scenario.

It's fine to come up with ideas that promote the reduction of things that in theory increase warming, but it's extremely dangerous (or at least stupid) for life on Earth to do anything on a large scale that promotes global cooling of the atmosphere.

When you start throwing words like "dogma" around it's obvious where you stand.

It's only obvious to the terminally ignorant - folks exactly like you. who ignore the balance of what I wrote so that they have stones to throw.

So will a million other factors, most of which can't be foreseen or predicted. Would your Grandparents have foreseen the day that you could access the entirety of human knowledge on a device that fits into the palm of your hand?

The Earth and humanity have never been and never will be static entities. The climate has changed a great deal during the geologically insignificant amount of time that humans have been around. Most of those changes occurred before we started digging carbon out of the ground. Changes will continue long after we've moved past carbon based energy supplies. The notion that the climate was "ideal" during some specific period would be laughable if there wasn't a serious movement trying to use it to make public policy.

Random samples of people.
Classify them in groups of similar genetic attributes.
Track development of these groups over time, record environmental differences.

Correlate the environmental differences with final outcome.

Sorry dude, but it's already been sold.

Deniers pretend to be skeptics. However, they are actually exactly the opposite: the distinguishing feature of deniers is not skepticism, but credulity-- they seen to credit pretty much anything they hear (or read on a blog somewhere)-- if it supports their pre-existing opinions.

And how is that different from the True Believer? Very few people who claim to worship at the altar of science behave in any way notably differently - tell 'em it's Science and if it supports their pre-existing opinions they adopt it as Gospel. Many people who claim to respect Science as little better than cargo cultists.

Of course. Maybe not where you live, but in a great many parts of the world public transport is excellent.

Well, unless specifically stated, since Slashdot is a US centric site, you assume most statements are about the US.

And aside from a few cities here in the US, there really is no viable mass transit system here. Everyone pretty much needs a car.