Comment Re:Why such terms? (Score 1) 319
I'd like to meet your daughter when she's an adult. (I am serious. She should be really pleasure to be around and really interesting.)
I'd like to meet your daughter when she's an adult. (I am serious. She should be really pleasure to be around and really interesting.)
So - you are assuming that space science is solely NASA then?
No. They're just the lion's share. My view is that for space science, they probably outweigh the rest of the planet, including the DoD's expenditures on space science.
What about developing the engineering and technological means to allow for long stays on the moon? Spend 5-10 years researching astronaut safety, building materials, biospheres, ecological and environmental surveys for using natural resources - then go to the moon for extended stays of weeks and months? Using this technology to then go to Mars? It is the choice of where to put the limited funds for the next 5 years, 10 years... where will it be of the most use?
Personally, I'd rather the US's budget were reduced by a factor of two or three. Elimination of NASA funding as a side effect would be acceptable. But since it isn't going to happen, yes, with the proviso that extended stays mean stays of years, not weeks or months. Unmanned space science missions should take advantage of well known economies of scale (such as reuse of technology and standardized components, building more probes at a time to spread out development costs, and missions that favor smaller, more frequent launches over larger, less frequent launches. And such research should support US economic needs, such as figuring out how to make money from activities and resources in space.
The main problem with Firefly was that Fox showed them out of order, with The Train Robbery as the first episode on tv. I watched about 1/2 hour of it and turned it off. Wasn't until Serenity movie hit cheap DVD's at Costco that I watched it and then picked up the entire series. Watching it in the order Whedon filmed them, it was a lot better.
'Course, I've heard that Fox has a revolving door with upper management and it's usually a new manager coming in who kills off shows of his predecessor, sorta' like a dog pissing on another dog's spot.
Bummer.
Did they make a quantum leap in 4.0,
No they made a big change, not an incredibly small one.
"Did the writer's ever actually read the original Jack Kirby, Stan Lee comic that this was based on?"
Of course they did. They also read the Ultimate (FF,Galactus) series of comics, and introduced some of those ideas because their superiors at Marvel forced them to. The result was the mess you watched in the theater.
There is no way that a) Downey is going to agree to doing an ensemble picture as a bit player after headlining 2+ Iron Man movies, or b) That the studio is going to spring for the big money it would take to hire him, just for an ensemble role in a risky new franchise.
No way? a) Iron Man is the Leader of the Avengers. Downey gets to boss around the other stars, and stare down Jackson, who will only have one eye to stare with. b) Maybe it's part of his contract that he'll play Iron Man in three movies, like McGuire got stuck for Six Spiderman movies.
to deference any NULL pointer would effectively be calling that function, assuming this memory mapping really works.
It's not as simple as that. If the kernel contained a read access to that pointer in the exploitable code, it would still perform a read, even though the memory location contained executable code. The only thing would be, that now you would have the numerical value of the instructions in a register, that's it.
But in many cases, the NULL pointer dereference would still be exploitable, it would only be slightly more complicated.
New York... when civilization falls apart, remember, we were way ahead of you. - David Letterman