Even space launch economics aside, the dragon spacecraft can return cargo to earth from LEO.

This is a technology that only only a number of countries you can count on your fingers can do. Fewer still with anything actively doing it. Even if SpaceX stops developing tech tomorrow, it's still had an immediate impact the US and the world's ability to do research in space now and for years to come.

The summery isn't quite correct. The engines aren't based on an engine from the 60s. These -are- the engines built by the soviets in the 1970s. These things are 40 years old.

The RD-180s used by the Atlas-V are built new, despite their relationship to the abandoned Energia/Buran. The NK-33s that are used by the Antares sat for decades in a Russian warehouse.

It was clarified later that both companies would fly six missions each (not counting the test mission).

I don't know if the director misspoke or was misunderstood, but she said later in the conference call they have the same requirements for the number of missions.

Indeed. Now that I am writing from the future (IE, after 5pm after this was actually announced). Both Boeing and SpaceX were awarded the exact same contract: certification, a test flight, and then six missions to the space station.

The only difference is that Boeing charged $1.6B more for the same service. Make of that what you will, but I can't say I can blame NASA -too- much for not wanting to put all their eggs in one basket.

And in it's place we got the commercial cargo and commercial crew programs, which have been highly successful so far. So much so that NASA is now looking to duplicate the process in other endeavors: http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1407/27marstelecom/#.VANoxEi0b0c

Meanwhile the Orion capsule, which was the part of the constellation project that actually put humans on top of those rockets to get them into space, was kept. It's still over budget, under speced and years off from putting anyone in space.

I work in an office that is packed in with three people constantly talking on the phone, with other people or just otherwise doing their business. I find it incredibly distracting. Sure I can put headphones on and try and blot it out, but depending on my mental state or particular task, music can be distracting too. Be it Metal or Minimalism music isn't always the answer to getting the best mental state for your work. Also having the music cranked means I can't hear the phone when I'm getting a call. I can't even imagine working in a larger room packed with dozens more people.

I'd love to be in a properly lit and laid out office or cubical.

Which just shows how short-sighted this is. With the logistics of launchers and launch services off of NASA's plate, NASA should be more busy then ever looking to go back to it's main business: pushing the bleeding edge of space, science and aeronautics. Something that that center will no doubt play a large part of. Certainly a lot more then just buying all the hard stuff from Russia.

I think it's still just as likely this is really just about protecting the interests of big contractors who find large profits to be made in building disposable, multimillion dollar rockets. Will SpaceX deliver everything it's promising? I don't know. I think it's fair to not just to put all our eggs in that basket just yet, but the government money that has been spent on SpaceX seems to have been a good deal so far. They seem to have a real vision of moving forward and I think that's a risk worth investing in.

The fact is that the experiment they Facebook conducted was mild to what other corporations do every day under the umbrella of "marketing".

They use control groups and try every trick they can to manipulate your mood, feelings, impressions of their products. They carefully script interactions to take advantage of your feelings and social norms. Also take the recent example in the past few weeks of the scripts that Verizon's 'account retention' departments use to try and wedge people into keeping their account longer. Those weren't just thrown together, those were made with careful research and years of experiments on customers and focus groups.

The only difference with what Facebook did and the rest do is that they shared their results with everyone. Was Facebook Unethical manipulating people the way they did? I think so, and I'm only less interested in the service after that scandal, but what they got them in trouble was sharing it with the rest of the world in a way that might have also done some honest good. Now they will learn from their mistakes, keep it to themselves, and use that research purely to manipulate people for higher profit and no one will say a thing.

"The KGB have used Romeo spies"

Who'd have thought this would end in tragedy?