Nuke

ford pinto.

this thing is all in the application layer of the osi model. encryption and most of the other security features you need are usually handled further down. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osi_model

seems everytime somone conducts a survey, they only ask the opinions of the obnoxious loud mouthed idiots and not the introverted nerds that have better things to do than to fill out survey forms. also this. im declaring today febuary 12th, national key a newsvan day. you know what to do internet!

you can emulate pretty much anything on an fpga. just need some specs, assuming they havent thrown them out too.

i think most network hardware these days has hardware encryption built in. no need to do it in software or put any burden on the cpu. your firewall will likely prompt you to set up rules for a new connection as soon as its detected. its pretty much the same for any network enabled application. if you want to leave your local network, you will likely need to set up your router to do that. im not really that concerned, my network fu is strong (and i have an degree in that field).

threads like these always spew out streams of "no random failures" posts. which is unfortunate because i like the idea of being rewarded for running test flights. not so much that i want random failures. more failure modes maybe, all triggered by pilot error of course. a good example of this is if you fly retrograde into a planetary ring system and get hit with a randomly generated bit of ring material. after all you knew that ring was there, why did you fly into it backwards? or in this case running an engine with a nerfed thermal rating at full throttle for an extended period of time. you knew it was a prototype, why would you do that? there is nothing random about doing something stupid. im especially fond of missions where you have to go out and intentionally break things in the quest for data. this would be an excellent gameplay mechanic. i think we need to tighten up what the definition of a random failure is. i always think of it as being like the simulator scene in apollo 13. the astronauts are practicing their flight, and the engineers decide to throw them a curve ball. the whole point of this kind of drill is to teach the astronauts how to troubleshoot problems in a crunch. i certainly dont want the game to blow up a random part of my ship every 5-30 minutes for no reason at all beyond the pseudorandom number generator said so. but i would like to have some kind of troubleshooting aspect to the game, especially (and perhaps exclusively) during test flights. i have nothing against problems arising during a test so long as they are fixable and where fixing them results in a reward.

if you can do this then nerf. otherwise leave them where they are or buff. ultimately id like to be able to perform an orbital maneuver with ion engines in a non-masochistic way. 2 hours to make a transfer is just nuts. i can barely make room for an hour of game time a day, so they are completely unusable just because of the amount of time it takes to perform a maneuver with them. i certainly dont want to send all my available game time watching the dv gauge go down. that makes a 2 hour burn 30 minutes. do you really want to watch a dv gauge go down for 30 minutes? if we can get a 10-20x ion mode that would be great.

im thinking something where you park the plane in the hanger. you can then store the plane (its taken out of play) there until you want to use it again, then you can select it from a list of stored aircraft. when you do its refueled and ready to fly.

i kinda want this but i dont just want places to land, i want to be able to start missions there too, store aircraft, and refuel. they should be intractable, but obviously not with the full facilities of the space center. and make it moddable.

no, its not, it was the one done by the x-plane guy. he seems to have taken it down.

you can already toggle gimbals and rcs thrusters on and off, idk why the same rules couldnt apply to control surfaces.

i discovered orbiter after getting fed up with arcade style space sims. this was a year or two prior to the 2010 release. it wasnt really that much fun. once you could go to the moon and return home it kinda got old. but it had a lot of mods. so i played mods for awhile. tried a jupiter mission. got there but never made it back. there was another game called space combat that like ksp let you build a ship and then fly it in a newtonian engine. it even had some weapon systems. but it wasnt very useful for learning orbital mechanics.

i bought my throttle, stick and pedals all in one pass. me personally i never liked twist handles. its a clever way to throw another axis on a stick, but i find it usually throws off accuracy of the other axes when you use the twist handle. when i was still using a saitek x52(the early version with all the bugs) before i got the ch gear, i kept the twist lock on. its more personal preference than anything. of course i can use pedals rather proficiently too.

whoever said i was healthy? you try going through life pulling your own teeth and doing your own stitches. it aint fun. that said, i bet he just inhaled a bug in his sleep and these are its fettid, desicated remains. statistically humans inhale 3 insects a year, this is the body's way of getting rid of it. evolution has graced us with this miracle damage control system called pain. its usually a good indication of damage.

i thought they were gonna settle that over a game of quake 3 arena?

im sorry but i seriously distrust the healthcare establishment. haven't seen a doctor in 20 years. maybe if they would let the doctors run the show and not the insurance companies. besides all the advice seemed a little redundant so i pitched in something different.

if the fuel was lh2 this could get ugly. if a micrometeorite managed to puncture the fuel and into the cabin, this could cause a fire. also there is an issue that the tanks will likely be mostly empty for the return trip (especially if you intend to aerocapture at earth). so you would get the full unshielded dose. makes me wonder what a two way aerocapture mission would look like. use an impulse trajectory over a hohmann transfer on the earth->mars transfer gives you some surface time. both plannets have atmosphere so why waste the fuel on slowing down? heat shields may be neccisary. on the earth aerocapture you can separate from the mother ship in a return capsule and let the mothership fly on by.

dont give them doctors any money. they are all scam artists.

ch fighterstick. comes with a throttle wheel and hardware trim controls. best spring tension i have ever seen in a stick (not to strong not to weak, very linear), 3 4-way hats 1 8-way hat 4 buttons, best mapping software on the plannet. made in the usa. can be had on ebay for around $100. well worth the money. will last a long time (they even sell replacement parts). no twist axis, but i cant use one of those. if you also get the throttle you can use the little thumbstick as a rudder. has the same number of buttons and hats as the fighterstick. they can be merged into a single stick if you need to.

make them use power and make them tweakable so you can toggle them.

its probibly using a different graphics api. opengl instead of d3d (assuming it doesnt use opengl on windows).

im all for talented modders getting jobs at game studios.

the momentum of a black hole is going to be the net momentum of everything that it consumed, correct?

1: play the game till you are bored 2: play mods till you are bored 3: play something else

thats because we keep funding tokamaks. expensive beasts, slow to construct, they are. [/yoda] bussard said it better