razark

I think the best indicator of how badly KSP is implemented is the high number of clones/KSP-alikes/direct competitors it has spawned that handled everything so much better than KSP itself.

And I still mess it up.

Final Frontier

Oh, are we doing this one again? I don't remember. It was over 8 years ago, but it likely didn't end well.

But only 1/6th of those are actually Vulcans.

a transporter "accident" very quickly.

One, as long as he has the high ground.

Final Frontier Kerbal Construction Time Kerbal Launch Failure Chatterer Alternate Resource Panel

It's alright. I enjoy it, if I take my mind off the hook and don't get too much into the "pilots being used as ground troops half the time" problem. It's very much the Pacific WWII theater in space. I do happen to have it on DVD, so that should tell you if I think it's worth it.

Space: Above and Beyond?

I, myself, am not a very big fan of "Video unavailable". I find their works bland, and quite derivative of John Cage's 4'33".

Asbestos? Arsenic? Hemlock? Falling off a cliff? Volcanic eruptions?

https://xkcd.com/641/

Which is exactly why the doors are round. The original hobbit dwellings were holes in the ground, and the door originates back with the simple burrow opening.

And 90% of the time, it's my own code from a more than a year ago.

I'd suggest you look into Blue Peacock, if you want outlandish. Also known as the Chicken Powered Nuclear Bomb.

New computer acquired, hard drive recovered. My first KSP screenshot, 13 Jul 2012: And another, from a month later:

I've been watching Voyager recently (I only caught a few episodes while it was on the air), and aside from bringing up aliens they met in previous episodes, each episode seems pretty "bottled". Enterprise (Seasons 1 and 2) had a flow to episodes that put them into a framework, but Voyager seems like you could just shuffle the order the episodes occurred in, and you wouldn't lose anything. (As a big fan of TOS, I am going to completely ignore the fact that it was largely the same. Voyager had a big, long, semi-plot of getting back home, and Enterprise had humanity's first voyages into a large galaxy. Enterprise seemed to hold to the premise better, IMO.) I think Enterprise benefited from its premise of "we're making up the rules as we go along and encounter things we never thought of" to show the beginnings of the Prime Directive and other concepts. Voyager seems to throw them out the window and have the characters either hold the Federation rules as sacrosanct or considered an irrelevant obstacle to be discarded as the plot demands. I largely agree with this. I think season 4 was building to something beyond, but the series got canceled before it could have a payoff. All the time-travel crap could have been done away with, though. And that series finale was a disgrace. DS9? I tried to watch it. It bored the hell out of me for several reasons. I am also opposed to a Star Trek series set on a space station. The idea was to boldly go, explore new worlds, and meet new people. Not to boldly sit here at the same location and wait for the same repetitive people to show up to the same already explored place. It's Star Trek, not Star Sit Here.

... Well, <redacted>.

There's a simple reason for it. Look at the bombers. They have wings. Obviously, they are designed to be used both in and out of atmosphere. They "drop" bombs in space because that way you only have to train the crews one method to hit both planetary and space targets. It's the same reason x-wings bank when they turn. They don't have to, but if the pilot is trained in atmosphere, then they get used to the vehicle behaving a certain way, and then they can expect the same behavior no matter where they are operating. It's also why the pilot can hear what's going on around, even though they shouldn't hear the enemy. Like all control inputs, the sensor system is also fed through a computer to provide an output that the pilot expects, so he is never surprised.

Obviously, the bombs are not "dropped", but are ejected from the bomb bay with a small amount of force that makes it appear as though they were being dropped in a gravity field. Why this is considered any sort of useful method, rather than just launching a huge number of missile instead, I have no idea. I found it utterly frustrating to watch, as well.

That poor Hunagyan Spirit. Is it falling off the edge, or just sinking?

"Well, we don't know that the earth isn't flat." -The ex

1. Only used a single color font. 2. Font color is too dark, and can still be easily read. 3. The background is plain white, when it should, of course, be covered in a confetti image, or at least a color that conflicts with the font. 4. Points off for proper spelling, capitalization, and grammar. Really, the only things going for you here are font choice and extra exclamation points. This is in no way the appropriate style for a serious business communication. (Yes, I have seen all of these in emails before. From the same person. All in one email.)

I don't think I've used a screensaver in over a decade. I think my work computer locks after a certain time and blanks the screen. Are screensavers still a thing? Where's the old Star Trek one I used to use? Oh, here it is. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8gw9FhPuCk7SjsalkYY4imKYxiFARwY1