If the ecosystems can adjust to their demise, then surely they could equally well adjust to their return?
When a species goes extinct, the vacuum it leaves is filled by other species. When a new species is introduced, assuming it is successful, something else has to make way. Historically this is a bad thing. Have you not seen what's going on in Florida right now?

Why not? I'm curious.
Something isn't a good idea just because you are curious.

There 's no way to predict the effect of any given action or inaction. For all you know, reintroducing passenger pigeons could be the best thing ever to happen to the North American environment.
And for all you know? Re-read my first two replies to your comment.

Why is it just as wrong? Something isn't true just because you say it is; try to provide some rationale behind the statement.
And what precisely have you offered in that way in you're comment? Absolutely nothing. If you want to play that game, it works both ways.

If the Passenger Pigeon has been extinct for this long, it's safe to say that ecosystems have adjusted to their demise. Let's not see what the consequences of re-introducing them are. There is no way to predict the effect. If they are planning and engineering these hybrids just to study their work in captivity, well, that is just as wrong.

Okay, I see what you mean. It's too bad the summary is running people off. It really is a good article.

Clickbait? I think perhaps I don't understand this term like I thought I did. Could you define it for me?

The article itself is well written and more informative than most science articles I read. Also, there are no ads.

185 centimeters = ~6 feet
28 kilogram = ~61 pounds
30 kilograms = ~66 pounds

66 pounds by itself is not a terrible lot to lug around, but if this suit lets you work with that kind of weight continuously for 3 hours, that's pretty significant.

You are probably right, and in respect to cooperation space I am most concerned. It is only a matter of time before a nation (probably China) declares a region in orbit theirs. Worse, I suspect someone will eventually try to lay claim to some or all of the moon (again, likely China). It is sad because science, especially space science, should engender cooperation. If anything ever inspires us to drop our imaginary borders, it will be science. Conversely, if we go extinct, science will be the weapon.

I accept that China is now a leader in science and technology. I wish them the best on this project and I am sure it will yield fantastic science. I just hope by "international collaborators" they mean more than the Russian Federation. As an American, I hope we get in on the action.

Just one thing though: if you are going to go to the trouble to build such a big and expensive machine, why not build a linear collider? I realize it would take more land, but I'm sure they have it and the science would be even better. Correct me if I am wrong, but after the second refit of the LHC, isn't the next big international European science project going to be a big honking linear collider? At that point, it won't matter that China's collider is bigger, you can get more interesting results from a gigantic linear collider. Although the idea of a super-proton collider does tickle me a bit.

Slashdot editors,

Please don't ruin this by turning it into a video interview where you don't actually ask anyone's questions like you did the last one.

Sincerely,
Speaking for a lot of us.

Considering we have yet to - and may never - quantify the overall cognitive process that gives rise to our own sentient intelligence, will we have any way of knowing if and when we create a truly aware artificial intelligence?

Also the ports tree is a joy to work with. It also offers a much more sane environment for editing and managing configuration files. Not to mention the excellent FreeBSD handbook and well thought out, easily searchable documentation in general.

With a flexible OLED display that wraps around my entire forearm. Not sure where to put the battery, but I would not be surprised if that turns out to be a future tech.

I remember the first time I compiled it at version 0.6.3 - It was a hopelessly pathetic win95 clone. I was sure it would go nowhere. Then the 1.0 release came along and it was clear it had a future. I don't much care for KDE myself, but I do note it's contribution.

Everyone in this thread has made excellent points regarding the problems with re-using the main engines, as well as using solid rocket boosters. I see the folly.

I don't understand the criticism regarding the use of modified space shuttle engines and a coolant system from the Air Force. As far as I am aware, we never lost a shuttle due to main engine failure, and the Air Force is pretty good at not blowing things up. I have been following the SLS for awhile, and if they can manage to pull off the overall designs they have in mind without budget cuts or severe cost overruns ruining things, I believe it will be a fine rocket. Otherwise SpaceX is well on their way toward manned flight and their heavy lifter among other things, so I think were pretty well covered.

If this series had been presented in the traditional ask slashdot format, it would have garnered at least a couple hundred comments and an interesting discussion. You know, the one where the most highly rated questions are presented, coupled with the user name of the person that asked it, and followed by the response - all in text format. I don't see where anyone's questions are actually being presented here. How could this have gone so wayward? We deserve an explanation as to the thought process that ruined something that could have been great. You had the attention of Lawrence Lessig and you fucked it up. I don't get it.