Yes. I just checked it. You can find it on: www.Portable.Apps.com

I was using Code 42's "Crashplan", but quit after the first year because a) extreme memory hog, b) unlimited but $60/year, C) download is like KILOBYTES/SEC! I saw an offer on Shareware On Sale (also recommended) for Skyhub. On sale for $40, but that is for 2 TB LIFETIME! I will never use that much, I don't think. I have about a 800 GB drive and still 4/5 free and I have hundreds of free programs. Highly recommended as "Dashboard" Interface much more user friendly.

Okay, I guess it would not work as I thought.

I got an A+ in physics, admittedly in high school, so orbital mechanics were not covered. In any event, I read that the railgun package could be combined with a small rocket, enough to change the orbit to elliptical in the extreme so it would eventually fall into the sun - no? If not, no longer on earth.

I am not "astroturfing". I am fully for nuclear and renewables and against fossil fuels for a multitude of reasons, global warming being supreme. I agree with all the reasons why nuclear has not been used as the dreamers of the 1950's envisioned (nuclear cars and planes). But the railgun idea is not crazy. Unless you think NASA is crazy as well. Link: http://www.csmonitor.com/Scien... (among many).

I thought we in the Slashdot community were more civil. AND I quite doubt you are qualified to judge my mental health from afar. Be that as it may, if the fuel is "perfectly usable" why were they proposing to bury it in Yucca Mountain for 10,000 years??? Yes, I understand that fuel from some more modern reactors can be re-processed up to 95%. But some of this old stuff has been looking for a home for 50 years.

A little internet research proves you are in error viperiodaenz. I had read about it in SF novels (means nothing, but sometimes the ideas are partially true). I also had read about it in scientific research, as rocket travel is expensive, dangerous and non-reusable. Same tech for 50 years. Cannot change chemical reactions. So I found a couple of links that may help. The first explores the real possibility of a electromagnetic railgun shooting small loads several times a day. If the loads were of a standard size, it would greatly speed up space exploration. One could even build a more modern space station. Here is that link: http://physics.stackexchange.c.... The other is about NASA engineers combining a railgun with a scramjet to make it sazfe for human flight. Completely re-usable. Here that link: http://www.popsci.com/technolo.... So, my idea is not as far-fetched as you thought. As to whether the load can be radioactive waste, those hazards would have to be calculated.

Where are mod points when you need 'em. Concise and funny.

It may sound far-fetched, but an electromagnetic rail gun would be feasible. Especially if the waste could be made into smaller units. Just aim it into the sun! No more problem. As a side benefit, the technology learned from this could be used to perhaps shoot material into orbit to build spacecraft out THERE, where the high cost of escaping the gravity well of earth would not be present.

You are right. I want to learn Javascript. I know there is no typing. But useful for what I want to do: web page creation.

You very well could be right K.S. I am not a programmer. Wanted to be. Too late to start I think. I was just going by what was in the article. I had hoped others would comment on the the "3 modern condenters" but the bulk of comments are in line with the article: "it just works and it is fast and has HUGE libraries and legacy code." From what I could follow Julie seemed the most interesting, but the bugs not out of it yet.

OP here. Give this man some mod points for FUNNY!

OP here. This is what the article said. Compilers are the key. They have been around a long time. Another key is that commercial compilers (like Intel for example) further increase the speed, as the manufacturers know how to optomize the code for the specific CPU at hand.

I am OP: Sorry I had it down as all caps.