Kerbart

Classes are not objects. Maybe stick to PERL. You can do a lot of damage in Assembly if you're sloppy.

Aaaah. To use the rubber sheet analogy (pre-emptive snark: yes we know it's not the right model. It's an ANALOGY ) -- if I toss a marble really quick through a depression in the sheet it will go nearly straight, where if I release it slowly it will turn significantly?

Jealous! If it weren't for my allergies, or that the landladies don't allow pets, or that my wife is scared of them... oh well. What a beauty! I'm sure she'll lighten up your house.

What I never get with that... Suppose your satellite is in a 100km orbit. Wouldn't you see that satellite than roughly 40,000km ahead of you? Because the light would be travelling in the same straight line, right? Why don't we see earth ahead and back of us if we're really moving in a straight line that's curved in such a way that it forms a circle? I'm not denying Einstein's theory. It's just that I don't understand why it applies to mass but not to the same extend to light, apparently. Unless, obviously, I am missing something. What is it?

Relative is the keyword here. Given that the surface atmosphere of Mars rivals the vacuums most high school labs can produce I wouldn't get my hopes up too much. Let's put it this way: when flying (at the regular altitude of 35,000' to 40,000') do you ever fly through clouds? That tells you something about the ability of the atmosphere to contain liquid water at that point. And keep in mind that you'll have to double that altitude to get at the pressure levels where Mars' atmosphere is at.

A self-sustaining aquarium. All you need to do is plug it in and it'll run for 10-15 years without maintenance. It would make an awesome decoration in an office, and most office managers would happily pay good money for such a piece of fascinating, every changing, low maintenance decoration. And yet no one sells them. This might be a subtle indicator of the difficulties one will encounter building such an aquarium.

I forgot the name, but there was some flowchart software for MS DOS that did just that. It said things like "do this or this and we'll let our legal sharks loose on you." It also had "throw up menus" as Lotus-123 had a patent on "pull down menus" at that point. UPDATE: not only did some googling uncover the name of the software (Easyflow), I also found a link to the first part of the manual, including the EULA Here's the EULA. Those were simpler times back then... Bloodthirsty License Agreement This is where the bloodthirsty license agreement is supposed to go, explaining that EasyFlow is a copyrighted package, sternly warning you not to pirate copies of it and explaining, in detail, the gory consequences if you do. We know that you are an honest person, and are not going to go around pirating copies of EasyFlow; this is just as well with us since we worked hard to perfect it and selling copies of it is our only method of making anything out of all the hard work. For your convenience EasyFlow Is distributed on a non copy-protected diskette and you are free to do what you want with it (make backups, move from machine to machine, etc.) provided that it is never in use by more than one person at a time. If, on the other hand, you are one of those few people who do go around pirating copies of software, you probably aren't going to pay much attention to a license agreement, bloodthirsty or not. Just keep your doors locked and look out for the HavenTree attack shark.

I'm not a lawyer but how do 7.7 and 7.9 outlaw all mods? 7.7 covers the licensed application; that would be the code base that Squad (Deported, whateva) distributes. Data added to the gamedata folder are as much altering the licensed application as data added to the saved games folder; not at all. Unless a mere game save is now also breaking the EULA. What would not be allowed is distributing a mod in the form of a modified ksp.exe or modifying one of the game's data filesâ€â€at least that's the way I interpret it. 7.9 seems to cover only World of Warcraft kind of hacking -- manipulating your online account for your own advantage. Because that is so totally KSP. :\

It had a compelling story, it was entertaining, and most of the physics where a few magnitudes better than, say, Transformers or Star Wars. So yes, I liked the movie.

He's vaguely related to General Failure. As in: “Who is General Failure, and why is he reading my diskâ€Â* * the young ones here might not get that one. - - - Updated - - - I'm pretty sure he's either on my roster or I had him as a tourist, so yes, the generator can produce an Elon.

There's also a Terms of Services page. It seems Deported is a holding company, not unlikely for tax reasons (The Netherlands is quite the tax haven for foreign companies. Far less so if you live there, by the way). I would not be shocked if the rushed "1.0" release had something to do with this.

If all he gets wrong "from the book" is the way the space mars suit looks, then the movie is going to be awesome!

What matters is that if you're talking about, say, how much grass you need for a football field measuring 90x45, we're both talking about the same thing, being either meters, yards, or potrzebies. And given that the global standard is the SI system, it would make sense to embrace that. As for the origin, the meter was defined as 1/10,000,000th of the distance from the north pole to the equator (along the meridian going through Paris, to be precise). This distance was then measured out on a piece of metal which became the definition of one meter. As science improved, methods of defining the meter have been redefined into "easily" reproducable laboratory tests, removing the need to travel to Paris to recalibrate rulers. As for the second, according to Wikipedia: Since 1967, the second has been defined to be the duration of 9192631770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom. Not 9192631771, not 9192631769, but 9192631770 -- so you can figure out the accuracy from there.

Telling the US to go metric is like telling to smoker to quit or the fat man to lose weight. Yeah, we all know we ought to. And it's better for us in the long run. But maybe another time, ok?

Well the world is still here. So there's that.

The poll is not really clear to me. Is this about what should be included in stock, or is it about the existence of weapons mods in the first place? Personally I don't think the stock game should have it. The stock game focuses on science and I'd rather not see the "science of killing" included in that. At the same time, it's a sandbox game with mods. if someone wants to make a mod, and others like to use it, why not? I even don't mind if there are facilities in the API to facilitate this (Splosion classes, etc). I'd definitely not like the idea of Squad going old-style Lego* trying to discourage or even make it impossible to make such mods (not that I'm suggesting they do); if the community wants something like that, why not? *in the olden days, Lego didn't manufacture green bricks as they could be used to construct tanks and other military equipment.

Technically speaking that's not true. The gain is it looks cool which in a movie is a pretty big deal. But yeah, in the context of the portrayed environment; absolutely. And even then... Sane engineers would orient the decks on the Enterprise aligned with the main direction of propulsion, one would think, and not perpendicular to it. - - - Updated - - - That's just efficiency; nobody goes there anyway.

It's easier to just right-click on the decoupler and activate it to launch a stage. Maybe even switch them out for docking ports to prevent a distaster when you accidentally (but so hilariously Kerbalesque) hit the space bar.

What is this "saving" you are talking about?

Boarding the destination craft is easier when you align it with the N/S axis of the planet (ie pointing to normal/anti normal in a 0° inclination orbit, which all rescue missions seem to be)

About 600 mâ„s; enough to get into Minmus orbit.

It's the change of direction. A "slingshot maneuver" doesn't really speed up or down the ship itself (as you're falling towards the gravity well and then away from it in a symmetrical trajectory in reference to that well). But it changes the angle of the orbit you were in before the assist, and that's what makes the difference.

Reducing the gimbal range is another way. Oscillations are the result of SAS overcorrecting and turning into a positive feedback loop. Locking the gimbals on your boosters and reducing the gimbal range on your main engine is an easy way to achieve oscillation reduction without having to resort to adjusting the way you control the rocket.

How I wish that Werner von Braun would have said “Now zat ve know zat ze Zaturn Vife launches reliable, vy not ztrap zwelf of zose together wiz lots of struts and zee vhat happens, ja?â€Â

Because Scott Manley, Danny et al are targeting an audience that already plays KSP. PewDiePie targets and audience that largely (if not completely) is unaware of KSP. 10% of the Scott Manley viewers who don't know KSP and will give it a try is... nothing. 0.1% of PDP viewers who will give it a try is... a lot. That's why it would make any change.