And exactly what should they produce then? What do you consider results? And why should we listen to you?

NASA has produced results. Perhaps not the results you like, perhaps they were not as profound or as glitzy as you would like, but they got results. Including a smooth-running ISS, a mars rover that goes on and on and on and on and on, and a new launch system.

Now, I understand that proving that you are a hoopy frood by slagging of NASA on /. is too tempting for some people, but that doesn't mean it is a sane point of view.

So, you're saying you have to be intelligent to appreciate movies like this?

That's a rather, er, unusual point of view.

Or perhaps the critics are the wrong kind of idiot?

I'm not so sure these concealed-carry fantasies work so well in practice, but that's beside the point.

The point is that if civilisation breaks down, as a lone wolf you don't stand a change, even when you're armed. You'll have to sleep sometimes, you'll run out of ammo, you'll run out of food, you may get ill. There will always be a `local community to support', whether you like it or not.

If you're unlucky the local community is a tribe of bandits that kills or enslaves you.

If you're lucky the local community is a tribe of bandits that demands protection money/tax/tribute. The resemblance to a getto gang, a maffia group, ISIS, Hamas, or an other guerrilla group may be painfully obvious, but they will be making you an offer you cannot refuse.

If you're really, really lucky the local community is a group of people that want to maintain some semblance of civilisation. They may even leave you alone if you don't look like a threat, but don't expect freeloading on any on the benefits of this community. However, if you're wise you thank your lucky stars that you have such a wonderful local community to join, even if they need your support.

I think the movie is only in the phase where they leak the names of the main characters, or perhaps some teasers from the script.

That's ok, there will be nearby tribe that will shoot you and steal all your stuff, so you don't have to worry. Oh wait, they could also make you a slave.

You think this is harsh? When central government breaks down this is what you get: libertarian paradise.

This is a pretty good illustration of being a denier rather than a sceptic:

Straw man. The discussion is scientific, not religious, and you're distorting what the scientists are saying. If you have scientifically valid objections against the current state of the science you are very welcome to the debate. If you just object because you don't like what the scientists are saying, you're a science denier. Nobody will burn you at any stake, but nobody will take you serious either.

Shooting the messenger. You may not like Al Gore, but that doesn't mean that his message was wrong.

You're trying to discredit climate change based on emotional arguments, rather than on objective arguments. That makes you a denier rather than a sceptic; exactly what this discussion is about.

I've never been able to make much sense of Adobe's stance in this, but as far as I can tell Adobe thinks that case-sensitive file systems are useless and if they wait long enough they will go away.

I vaguely remember that one version of Photoshop failed on case-sensitive volumes, and there was a patch circulating that fixed about 9 filenames scattered throughout the code, and solved the problem. Rather than applying this patch, Adobe chose to block installation on case-sensitive volumes in modern versions.

Keep in mind that Mac OS X supports case-sensitive HFS+ filesystems, and has done so from Mac OS X 10.3 on (2003). All you have to do is create a partition with that particular flavour of HFS+.

However, Adobe refuses to support case-sensitive filesystems. The Photoshop installer refuses to install on a case-sensitive filesystem, and Lightroom geolocation support is broken on case-sensitive filesystems, and always has been. Of course this limitation is not documented in their sales documentation, and the official fix is to reformat the partition...

That makes no sense. The overthrow of Saddam Hussein and the destruction of his entire army apparatus was wat created the power vacuum that ISIS is now stepping into. For all his obvious evil, Saddam Hussein managed to create a militarily and economically strong Iraq that would have made short work of any bandits trying to invade Iraq, no matter what their sales talk.

Any attempts at nation building after the Iraq invasion were at best pathetic. Cynically corrupt windowdressing is a better description. I'm sure some coalition people (for example in the US defence industry) thought his period was far too short, but the Iraqi people thought differently, despite the obvious dangers.

Iran taking over Iraq is just delusional.

Did you think about the consequences of what you are saying even for a second?