America’s angriest store?
I have to say, this hasn’t been my experience, but I don’t go that often — I think most of the food is way overpriced. It might be partly a function of geography.
Via Dr. Eades:
This has been my exact experience. Probably comes from not enough good quality dietary fat for the brain. http://t.co/6ONmMOtnlz
— Michael Eades, M.D. (@DrEades) January 13, 2015
[Update a few minutes later]
Wrong link, fixed now, sorry.
My thoughts on this weekend’s mostly-successful flight over at PJMedia.
Forget it, what people want is more battery life.
This obsession with “thin” phones makes me crazy. Have the gay men who run the fashion industry, but hate normal female bodies, taken over tech as well?
I just “upgraded” from my dying Droid Global 2, a phone whose batteries were easily changed, for a Droid 4, which has a better OS, and is 4G instead of 3G, and slightly thinner, but has a non-replaceable battery. I consider it a downgrade.
…and failed landing. That’s what flight test is about. They’ll learn from it, as they always do from a failed attempt.
I would note, though, that this does complicate their operations, if they plan to land down range every time, and can’t return to launch site. I suspect they’ll determine that the problem was crappy weather conditions, and their FLIR or whatever they were using for guidance wasn’t doing very well. That means that there’s a new condition imposed on a decision to fly — weather at recovery site. Shuttle often scrubbed with good weather at the Cape, due to unacceptable conditions at abort sites, and that was just for contingency. If SpaceX wants to recover down range, they may occasionally have to make a decision as to whether to risk the loss of a stage, or delay and arouse customer ire. It will depend on whether or not there’s a tight window (e.g., a planetary mission), and who the customer is.
[Update a couple minutes later]
Oh, I hadn’t read to the end. It sounds like it wasn’t a weather problem — they “ran out of hydraulic fluid” (not sure what that means — it’s not a closed system?). But that seems like good news, both for their chances of recovering next time, and for being able to operate in less-than-perfect conditions. Sounds like they only thing that might prevent a launch, in terms of barge conditions, would be sea state (or high winds), not weather per se.
[Update a few minutes later]
Here‘s what looks like a reasonable explanation from Jon Goff. I haven’t read the post itself yet, but I’m sure it’s worthwhile to do so.
[Update a few minutes later]
OK, Elon just tweeted that it was hydraulics for the control fins, and they came within 10%. So that means an excellent chance of success the next time, with the addition of a little bit more juice.
[Update a few minutes later]
Upcoming flight already has 50% more hydraulic fluid, so should have plenty of margin for landing attempt next month.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 10, 2015
SpaceX explains its rocket using the most commonly used thousand words in the English language.
No, it’s not like going on a diet:
Even when people aren’t directly invoking the carbon diet in their language, they often echo its principles by suggesting that everyone needs to cut back. But it falls apart—and starts to seem downright sinister—when you look at its priorities. Most of the world does not need a carbon diet. Three-quarters of the global population uses just 10 percent of the world’s energy, 1 billion people lack access to electricity, and 3 billion cook their food over dung, wood, and charcoal, leading to millions of early deaths. These people are energy starved—and they need a feast, not a diet.
These people are essentially advocating mass murder.
California goes full boondoggle:
IF the internet doesn’t change the way people work, reducing both commuting and the demand for business travel, IF the giant project doesn’t mimic almost all similar projects and develop gigantic cost overruns that make a mockery of the initial cost elements, IF resourceful NIMBY groups and their lawyers don’t find too many endangered species in its path or otherwise tie it up in endless litigation, IF self driving cars don’t make rail travel obsolete, IF the fares aren’t so high even with subsidies that passengers shun it, and IF unlike almost all other passenger rail service in the U.S. it doesn’t lose buckets of money, this project could look like a smart move.
IOW, it’s insane.
…is over?
The experimental drug, which was isolated from a sample of New England dirt, is called teixobactin. It hasn’t yet been tested in people, though it cured all mice infected with antibiotic-resistant staphylococci bacteria that usually kills 90 percent of the animals, according to a study published today in the journal Nature. Bacteria appear to have a particularly difficult time developing resistance to the drug, potentially overcoming a major problem with existing antibiotics.
They’re probably a little overoptimistic on that one, but it’s good news in the short run at least.
I can’t even start to describe how insane this is.
How do they propose to do two SLS launches for a mission when they are only planning one every couple years? And why in the world would they need one to launch crew?
A good survey from The Economist why we can’t blindly accept the “authority” of “science” or scientists:
Too many of the findings that fill the academic ether are the result of shoddy experiments or poor analysis (see article). A rule of thumb among biotechnology venture-capitalists is that half of published research cannot be replicated. Even that may be optimistic. Last year researchers at one biotech firm, Amgen, found they could reproduce just six of 53 “landmark” studies in cancer research. Earlier, a group at Bayer, a drug company, managed to repeat just a quarter of 67 similarly important papers. A leading computer scientist frets that three-quarters of papers in his subfield are bunk. In 2000-10 roughly 80,000 patients took part in clinical trials based on research that was later retracted because of mistakes or improprieties.
It’s a mess.