It seems likely that electric vehicles will eventually replace fuel powered engines, so why not encourage that transition rather than screwing the formulation of gas even more?
I'm now seriously considering replacing my current vehicle with an electric one because then the EPA regulations won't destroy my engine by changing the fuel formula. Hmm, maybe that's part of what they're thinking... Nah.
The lander itself was ready to go, as was everything except the seismometer. That seismometer was being built by the French space agency (CNES), and they couldn't get it through final testing due to a vacuum leak in time to get it delivered in time to install, test, and launch.
"NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Pasadena, California, will redesign, build and conduct qualifications of the new vacuum enclosure for the Seismic Experiment for Interior Structure (SEIS), the component that failed in December." - http://www.nasa.gov/press-rele...
So, it's already been given to a different organization.
Full disclosure - I work on the lander. We busted our asses for over 2 years to get this thing ready, only to be thwarted by CNES.
Another expense might be making the GRAIL orbiters dual-string (duplicate almost everything on a single orbiter, two main computers, two batteries, etc). According to http://moon.mit.edu/spacecraft.html GRAIL is single-string because that matches the mission reliability requirements.
Also - I was on the GRAIL development team and I'm currently working GRAIL mission operations, so I'd also be employed for a little while longer if we repeated this experiment at Mars.
As OP explicitly said C++, I have to wonder, are they looking for an Object Oriented type of framework? If so, GLUT doesn't fit the bill, it's a pure C, function callback oriented framework. It could be used in an OO like manner, but it isn't OO itself.
The only OO framework I've found for use with OpenGL is FLTK, but my experience with OpenGL is quite limited. What other OO frameworks are available and worth the effort to learn?
If you can get to an ER in less time then the Ambulance would take to arrive you are ahead of the game anyhow.
Definitely not true. A stroke victim that goes to the wrong hospital (handling a stroke requires a special set of equipment and skills that not every hospital has) will have to wait for EMS to transport them to the right hospital. Now they've got the time it takes to transport them to the wrong hospital as well as the time it takes to transport them again to the right hospital working against them.
That's typically true no matter where you live. Emergency response times suck universally.
Citation? I've been in a couple automobile accidents and EMS was present within a few minutes. All depends on where you live.
If you can safely move the person you call 911 and start driving. The ambulance can meat you halfway if things are that bad.
Interesting, don't know if it's done or how EMS responds to this.
Yes, I know how expensive an ambulance ride is. It's all absurdly priced, but I guess you avoid the whole billing issue if you die before you even get there. This approach does come with its own set of drawbacks...
It's all a calculated risk, one way or the other. Most people don't understand all of the reasons for taking the ambulance, and so make this decision without all of the info.
Fair enough. Perhaps I should have said call 911 instead of an ambulance. Still might not address your point, and unfortunately I don't know the answer to your question...
This is definitely something to consider if you have the choice on where to live (I recognize that a number of people don't have that choice). I still picked a rural area.
A computer scientist is someone who fixes things that aren't broken.
