While I understand your sentiment, if I was an astronaut aboard the ISS I don't think I would appreciate a unknown, unexpected, untested, unverified rocket hurtling towards my fragile little home.

"Don't worry, the boosters will shut-off in time. I wrote the code myself!"
"How hard could it possibly be to hit a 1 meter capture ring? And if we miss it'll bounce right off those solar panels."
"Com'on! Open your pressurised habitat to our craft. We used like a whole tube of silicone to seal it up."
"Oh... You might not want to eat the chilli-dogs I packed you after all. Uncle Billy has spent a week on the toilet after eating three."

And these are some of the best case scenarios that I imagined.

OT I know.
I think it is cute that there are still people who think that government spending is limited to the GDP.
Get with the times man! Free your mind from the inferior thinking that spending must be less than income.
Why with modern financing we could spend hundreds of times the GDP on solving the problem of getting politicians elected.

Does anyone have any insight into these electro-static orbits.

I'm curious if the orbit would decay naturally if this was done in a vacuum. Is the air friction the only thing stealing the droplets velocity or is there a change in the droplet (and needle) charge, resulting in a electromagnetic force against the droplet?

"STS-335, the rescue mission that would fly only if needed to bring home the members of space shuttle Endeavour's STS-134 mission, currently the final scheduled shuttle flight. "

http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2010/sep/HQ_10-222_LON_Annc.html

For those wishing to have a little celebration on their desk

http://www.nickrobinson.info/origami/diagrams/shuttle1.htm
http://www.nickrobinson.info/origami/diagrams/shuttle2.htm

Because you would be surprised how often it changes. Just because you wouldn't be caught in such a stupid lie, doesn't mean others wouldn't. Same reason tech support has to ask if it plugged in. Asking simple questions bags plenty of low hanging fruit without having to get CSI on everyone.

Could you please elaborate where Google has "Done More Evil". People questioned the privacy of their searches and they have since stated their privacy terms clearly (years ago). Google has advocated more open format and open source solutions backed with real money and development. They lobby for net neutrality and open access. I really don't see how they are doing evil.

People have to get used to the idea that if you type information into a website, that website has that information. It's pretty straight forward and there is no way around it. Even if they state they they will delete it, you can't verify that they have and should treat it as such. If you want to remain untrackable from any service, you have to use a proxy; end of story. PS. There isn't a shred of evidence that Google doesn't abide by their terms of service.

Without a specific grievance, it sounds like you are just rebelling against the popular and successful to make yourself feel special.

Go watch television if you don't want involvement. This is not a website for breaking news and generating content. Slashdot links to those things... and heres the kicker, discusses them as a community. Not all the comments are worthy of a pulitzer prize but some cream generally floats to the top. For this reason some discussions don't even focus on the linked article and are more focused on the commenter's own experiences. This is clearly one of those discussions. The summary has the question right there. There are millions of webpages out there. Don't bitch when one of them for one day doesn't perfectly satisfy your whims. It is clearly making other people here happy.

firefox -no-remote will open a new instance on linux, I have no idea about windows. --ProfileManager to get the profile manager