The same question could be asked about oil.

And SHE KNOWS BETTER.

Sure, all the candidates know better -- but many voters don't. They believe what they want to believe. For example when gas prices go up under a democrat president you'll hear right-wingers crying about how the president causes it and left-wingers claiming he doesn't have control. When the prices go down you'll hear right-wingers claiming he had nothing to do with it and left-wingers claiming he made it all better. Vice versa for a republican president. Nobody cares what the president can actually do when they are at the polls, they only care that what the candidate said resonates with their world view, however rational or bat-shit crazy it may be.

You and I can tell the difference between a blind campaign promise and a plan for something that's actually achievable, but many people either can't or won't make the effort to do that. That's what drags our political discourse down a series of tubes. We, collectively, get the candidates we deserve. The fact that the best candidates available right now are people like Donald Trump is a reflection of our own society, sadly.

I didn't realize it was a competition and only one thing can be good for mankind. Does that mean we should stop all exploration and focus only on expanding the internet?

I'm OK with NASA not focusing on preserving history. Their budget is for space exploration, not museum curation. If they actually gave these spacesuits to the museum and then the museum tried to crowdfund it, would you be complaining about it?

That said, it's probably better that NASA be involved because they can help with the research -- some things shouldn't be repaired because they are part of the suit's history, and NASA would probably be better able to distinguish.

You seem to be confusing sports with athletics. They are not the same. Fishing, for example, is a sport that average people perform while sitting around drinking beer, yet nobody complains about it being called a sport.

That study compares music to silence while the GP is comparing music to noise. I think there may still be room for additional research there.

Are you sure? I can't tell where the summary got that number but the article also references "tens of millions." -- do you have another source with better info?

Wait! Your shirt has a back pocket? Tell me more about this marvel of modern fashion.

I can't tell if you're serious, but in any case cyclist's shirts have pockets along the lower hem on the back because they are out of the way when you lean forward and because pockets on your legs would be difficult to used due to leg movement. It has nothing to do with fashion and everything to do with function.

Agree with the rest of your comment though -- bike computers that do everything have been on the market for decades. Not to mention existing fitness watches that also fill the same market.

Maybe. The only link in TFS goes to a short blurb and a video from Virgin about how feathering works, which is nothing new either. I still don't understand what made this news all of a sudden.

It's pretty cool and all, I just don't get why this story on Slashdot exists. Most slashdotters have known about this technique for years, since it was explained by Virgin the first time.

What's the news in this? This has been Virgin's approach for many years now, and it's very interesting, but what brought this to the front page today? Did something change?

Or how about putting a switch on those outlets somewhere that the general public can't get to it, or is at least unlikely to?

Seriously. You know it's bad when even the sports league's network blacks out their own broadcasts so only the cable company can carry it.

That's not the answer I expected! Thanks for the info.

Agreed, although what MS seems to be saying is "I will pay ADDITIONAL taxes but only if you spend it a certain way." Subtle but important difference. More akin to a donation for a particular cause than a voluntary tax.

Bachelor's? Master's? Ph.D? All of them combined?