NFUN

Of course, were you expecting something different?

The police suspected New Horizons of drug trafficking, so they pulled it over and it is waiting for its trial. Nobody has paid the bail for it

You can even see the holes (for containers of dip?) in the guy's on the right.

You're probably right.

Apparently, they are reprogramming it so that it won't go into safe mode during the flyby, no matter what happens. The scientists would rather risk damage to the probe than having a failure at the critical moments. I don't have a source offhand.

I mean pre-Hardmode Skeletron on Expert. Even with molten armor, he is freaking impossible. One needs to be amazing or have at least 2 other people for respawning. He has undodgeable skulls that do a ton of damage. Once his arms are dead, and he is practically invincible once his arms are destroyed. By the way, luminite is now the best ore. And one can farm chlorophyte, as it spreads. Just use weapons from the Martian Invasion after Plantera.

Screw Expert Skeletron.

We should be careful not to travel too far in time, lest all we see turn to brown as the sun burns the ground.

At some point, you are correct, and PvP matches become stale and dominated by a metagame of hard techniques almost required for victory. You may want to play games less competitively, and play more against the improving AIs where you are free to set the difficulty of the opponent and care less about the results of the match. Civilization, for example, may get old after a while, and people generally find one strategy that they like and stick with it. You might have more fun choosing different leaders and using strange, unique techniques just to see how they work to extend the lifetime of the game and minimize memorization of tactics. In KSP, certain rocket designs are common and work well, but that doesn't stop players from making outlandish craft for poops and giggles. Try playing a noncompetitive game of Starcraft with a build mainly of roaches and corrupters, or play chess using pieces only on one side of the board. When games with too much choice end up being too restrictive, use self-imposed challenges to break free of the meta.

What are you supposing they'd do? Windows 10 is free to get for the next year, and it is almost certain once one buys it, they own it (for that machine, of course). Microsoft is known for stupidity, but not even they would charge a subscription fee for their operating system-- imagine the reaction of somebody buying a crappy netbook in two years and being told that he'd have to pay recurring fees to use the operating system. Charging people for compatibility for legacy programs would also be ridiculous. The plural of anecdote isn't data, but nobody I know has had compatibility programs with Windows 8 with 7, and Windows 10 is far more similar to 8 than it is with its precursor.

1) A lot of irrelevant aspects to it. Say naval units. What do you use them for? The whole orbital affair lasts pretty much nothing because after you build your first units you have to go build the next thing or you'll die. Starcraft has no naval units, just air and land units, both of which are useful in different situations. One does not have to upgrade to the next best thing quickly or at all either, spamming marines works alright in lower tiers for example, and as far as I know there is no strict building meta. 2) Built units don't upgrade when you upgrade its class. In other strategy games, say Age Of Empires, if you upgrade from knights to paladins, your currently existing knights upgrade automatically to paladins. In PA, the 50 level 1 tanks you have will still be level 1 tanks after you upgrade your vehicle factory to produce better double turret tanks, so you end up having all these worthless units that are now outclasses by your enemy units and your only use for them is to send them to attack just because. All relevant units are upgraded when research is completed in Starcraft. 3) It's all about rushing. No other strategy is useful. Pro players have cautious, back-and-forth battles all of the time in Starcraft, and turtling can also work in lower tiers. 4) The galactic war campaign thingy is the same boring thing over and over: go to a planet, have a fight, get some tech, go to a planet, have a fight, get some tech... No story, no real progression. I don't know how it works in Planetary Annihilation, but the Starcraft campaign, while not being very interesting gameplay-wise, is fairly involved lore-wise and largely acts as an extended tutorial, with missions being based around using the new tech. RTSs almost always focus on multiplayer in any case. I'm not a Starcraft fanboy (haven't played it for years and was awful) but these problems don't apply strongly to the game. I haven't really played other RTSs which is why I'm focusing on SCII, my limited experience in Command and Conquer not being enough to yield an opinion.

Yeah, how dare M$ release a free OS, those money-grubbing jerks! Windows 10 is compatible with basically everything that worked with 7 and 8, and any scamming third parties are scamming third parties, leeches that are present anywhere.

He is referring to the effects of the speed of sound in aerodynamics, not the literal sound. Mach numbers are commonly used for a reason, and KSP simulates some effects of drag and heating as one breaks the sound barrier. - - - Updated - - - Pressure also has something to do with it, and some parts of the atmosphere are much hotter than you might expect.

You can remove all of that Metro crap if you want and have it basically act as Window 7's Start.

I believe he is saying that converting plastic to oil would be beneficial, making the post-Apocalypse more survivable with easy to access oil.

Hmm? I was just saying Bloomberg probably just took the first result from Google and used it for their story out of laziness.

Your sense of flattery is misplaced; don't thank Bloomberg, thank Google.

The expansion is greater than what would seem possible due to the speed of light because of the incredibly rapid inflation of the early universe, as well as the faster-than-light expansion of space theoretically, tentatively due to dark energy.

What you said makes much more sense in context, though I'm not sure it is quite the right explanation.

What is your theory trying to explain? What was your original hypotheses[is]. How could this be tested? Also, could this theory explain why I'm still awake, because I wanna go sweeeeeep.

Dark matter (aka WIMPs, Weakly Interacting Massive Particles) also fits the math best between it, MACHOs (MAssive Compact Halo Objects, basically regular matter that doesn't emit light) and MOND (MOdified Newtonian Dynamics) in solving some discrepancies in cosmic phenomena, particularly in the rotation speed of galaxies. Their angular velocities appear so great as to be able to tear them apart without some fudge factor to fix the math, so these theories were created in order to explain the issue. Dark matter works well at doing this while keeping other physics unaffected, and with mysterious gravitational lensing existing, it seems to be the best candidate all around. Dark energy is a bit more nefarious. Scientists don't really have a mechanism to explain it, and its need could be an error with the math, or perhaps the accelerating universal expansion is caused by something else entirely.

If you don't think reentry is deadly enough, you might like Deadly Reentry.

There isn't enough room and they are heavy. It was decided months ago that the mission will be sending a moss sample to LEO to measure changes in growth with different centripetal accelerations to simulate gravity. http://forums.mossat.org/

Atmospheres, even somewhat thin or cold ones, would have some wind and weathering, though of course to a lesser extent than active bodies with a water cycle.