Strange timing for this article to be posted nearly the moment -after- the dragon has splashed down and DSCOVR was delayed to Wednesday. Couldn't have waited one more hour?
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
Among Republicans, 48 percent said they are more likely to vote for a candidate who supports fighting climate change, a result that Jon A. Krosnick, a professor of political science at Stanford University and an author of the survey, called "the most powerful finding" in the poll. Many Republican candidates either question the science of climate change or do not publicly address the issue.
Funny to see people complain about knee-jerk reactions with a massive knee jerk of their own.
Chemistry kits and lasers aren't outlawed, so neither of the things are true. Why was this modded up?
Certain chemicals aren't commonly included in chemistry kits marketed for children for liability reasons. Make of that what you will, but that is still a long ways from "outlawed". In fact, I'd guess that most of the things that you might have found in those kids are still easy enough to find. They just don't come in a tin case with fancy graphics.
Sweet, then this is a problem easy to solve.
The second set of guys we can give an MP3 of classic cars, they don't even have to be on the road to enjoy it, and leave the rest of us in peace.
I found the real-name policy to be a real negative too. I think it's perfectly reasonable to want a level of privacy on the web. Total anonymity is probably not possible from any sort of social media, and maybe not wholly desirable, but I think it's fully within my rights to have a part of my life that isn't in the view of the management at my work. Or that a teacher might not want her social life being just a web search away from young students. Or hell, maybe there are just things I'd rather not have my grandmother see.
The 'circles' thing was nice, but it's really just not much of a privacy wall.
They don't have stock-holders or congressmen holding the purse strings to try and impress. They don't need to downplay or spin the outcome of a test flight because everyone involved knows that a good testing program will have some failures. And in fact finding new failure modes in early testing is better then not finding them at all.
So while to SpaceX this was a useful test; their stocks would be falling right now, sending bean counters into a panic were they publicly traded.
It looks like they lost a hydraulic pump for one of their thrusters from the photos I've seen. So not quite unscathed, that was probably tens of thousands of dollars of damage, but that's chump change if they can make it work.
Interesting that despite running out of fluid 30 seconds before the crash. It still landed in nearly the exact center of the platform. Is it just that it dosn't take much maneuvering even to cover that distance? Or was the platform moving to 'catch' it I wonder?
If buying cars were simply a matter of price vs purely practical specifications, we'd all be driving Toyota Yaris or commercial vans. Nothing wrong with these vehicles, but sometimes people want to pay a little more to get a little something else or extra out of one of the items that is to most people one of their largest personal investments.
Yes, for a small few it might be a choice to seem trendy or fashionable.. but so what? For the vast majority of people interested there are many big picture and pragmatic reasons to want a car like this. Yet, the criticisms and concerns people often express about cars like the Tesla are far less superficial then what seems to be the average criteria most people use to put value on their gas powered cars.
Also, Zarya is actually owned by the US. It was built, launched and I presume operated by the Russians, but it's still owned by NASA.
"Rocket made it to drone spaceport ship, but landed hard. Close, but no cigar this time. Bodes well for the future tho," Elon Musk tweeted shortly after the launch. He added that they didn't get good video of the landing attempt, so they'll be piecing it together using telemetry and debris. "Ship itself is fine. Some of the support equipment on the deck will need to be replaced."
Considering that most channels seem to work under the model of "Get as much to fill the schedule for as little as possible" I'm not sure that very much of value will be lost.
Look at it another way: The Travel Channel hires many different producers for it's shows. If the travel channel goes away, the channels that survive will be eager to snatch up the shows from the Travel Channel people (hypothetically) actually watched while all the filler just dries up. So now you have channels competing with each other to get people to buy their channels (like HBO does now), rather then just hoping people land on their channels for an hour and see a few commercials before moving on.
I have a feeling that channels will probably stick better to their formats, too. If they drift away from what their core wants, they will have to try and re-market themselves for their new format while the original watchers maybe don't renew that channel the next time their contract comes around.
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.