Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Mars Rover Spirit Still Alive

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the brief-flower's-bloom dept.

Mars 185

Toren Altair writes with this excerpt from a story at The Space Fellowship: "NASA's Mars Exploration Rover Spirit communicated via the Mars Odyssey orbiter today right at the time when ground controllers had told it to, prompting shouts of 'She's talking!' among the rover team at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif. 'This means Spirit has not gone into a fault condition and is still being controlled by sequences we send from the ground,' said John Callas of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., project manager for Spirit and its twin, Opportunity."

cancel ×

185 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Jews did 9/11. (-1, Troll)

Luke727 (547923) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757105)

It's true; I read it on the Internet.

This was a triumph! (5, Funny)

White Flame (1074973) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757113)

I'm making a note here:
HUGE SUCCESS.

NASA is promising moist delicious cake (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25757129)

But we all know the cake is a lie.

Re:This was a triumph! (4, Funny)

Sasayaki (1096761) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757195)

It's hard to overstate my satisfaction.

Re:This was a triumph! (4, Funny)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757287)

"the baby is crying"

(from someone at JPL)

At least you're not completely emotionally invested in this thing. Seriously, when it 'dies', somebody is going to need some serious counseling.

Re:This was a triumph! (2)

MadnessASAP (1052274) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757357)

Damn right, when the news came that it was over for Phoenix I got all depressed. The poor lander all alone out there, a million miles away from home. And I don't even work at NASA.

Re:This was a triumph! (3, Funny)

Cassius Corodes (1084513) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757447)

The poor lander all alone out there, a million miles away from home

Now you made me all depressed. A rescue mission I say!

Re:This was a triumph! (4, Funny)

Tavor (845700) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758057)

And I don't even work at NASA.

You're not smart. You're not a scientist. You're not a doctor. You're not even a full-time employee. Where did your life go so wrong?

Re:This was a triumph! (2, Interesting)

JosKarith (757063) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758491)

We're all going to need some counselling. Seriously - this little "lander that can" has outperformed expectations to such a massive degree. Spirit/Opportunity models might well end up taking a place next to the Darth Spuds on geek desks across the world...

Re:This was a triumph! (1)

meringuoid (568297) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758905)

Seriously, when it 'dies', somebody is going to need some serious counseling.

Cake and grief counselling will be available at the conclusion of the test. Thank you for helping us help you help us all.

Re:This was a triumph! (4, Insightful)

confused one (671304) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758959)

Of course people are emotionally invested. Think about it for a minute...

*waits*

It is not unusual for someone to put in 10 years of their life planning and building one of these things. They you have to wait for the launch, wait for it to reach Mars, and hope you get some good science out of it.

This rover was supposed to last at least 90 days. It's still going 5 years later. They're still getting good science out of it.

Now, with some of the people on the project having 15+ years of their lives invested in this, you expect them to NOT be emotionally invested?

Re:This was a triumph! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25758231)

We're doing science and I'm
STILL ALIVE

Re:This was a triumph! (2, Funny)

Ralith (1011801) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758449)

Aperture Science
We do what we must, because: we can.

Re:This was a triumph! (-1, Redundant)

bakedpatato (1254274) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757415)

break out the cake! oh wait, the cake is a lie.

Re:This was a triumph! (0, Offtopic)

Profane MuthaFucka (574406) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757747)

No, it's so delicious and moist. But, look at me - still talking when there's science to do.

Re:This was a triumph! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25757457)

wonder if there's cake on mars..

Re:This was a triumph! (1)

philspear (1142299) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757897)

NASA Science Military Android contingency plan activated. Please observe mandatory test protocol safety procedure as you proceed. Remember the NASA Science Military Androids are unable to distinguish between friend, foe and even common household items such as cake flour, office chairs and ... bzzzzt ... other nuclear devices.

Re:This was a triumph! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25758213)

It didnt eat the cake.

Everyone Dance! (5, Funny)

compro01 (777531) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757127)

And we're stayin' alive, stayin' alive.
Ah, ha, ha, ha,
Stayin' alive.
Stayin' alive.
Ah, ha, ha, ha,
Stayin' alive.

Re:Everyone Dance! (1)

ub3r n3u7r4l1st (1388939) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757157)

STAY THE COURSE!

Re:Everyone Dance! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25759161)

Gold Five: Stay on target

Re:Everyone Dance! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25757265)

I'm picturing a youtube video with rover edits, if only I was so inclined...

Re:Everyone Dance! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25758421)

you should'a put the cake is a lie!

They don't make 'em like that anymore (4, Funny)

fortapocalypse (1231686) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757159)

But I wish they did!

Re:They don't make 'em like that anymore (1)

DigitAl56K (805623) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757371)

According to the headline they do ;)

Setup a status page (4, Funny)

Bananatree3 (872975) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757165)

Abe Vigoda has one [abevigoda.com] ,why not the mars rovers?

NASA Automotives (5, Funny)

supun (613105) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757171)

It rains and my stupid car won't start. Their little rover can travel to a different planet, survive the cold, survive dust storms, etc and keep going. Maybe instead of bailing out the "big three", we should dump all that money into NASA to make cars.

I'm willing to risk my safety on a metric to standard conversion problem for a car that will run.

Re:NASA Automotives (4, Insightful)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757301)

I agree, I think your car would run pretty darn well if you had a dozen scientists and engineers continually operating and maintaining it.

Re:NASA Automotives (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25757321)

By maintaining it do you mean traveling to mars every 20 miles for an oil change?

Re:NASA Automotives (4, Funny)

lysergic.acid (845423) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757429)

clearly he means that auto mechanics will be able to fix your car remotely from 35~250 million miles away regardless of where it breaks down. they can even get your car unstuck remotely [npr.org] if you ever get stuck in a ditch.

suck on that OnStar! all they can do is unlock your car.

Re:NASA Automotives (5, Funny)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757595)

That's not fair. OnStar can also route all audio from your car to any law enforcement group that wants to keep an eye on you!

Re:NASA Automotives (2, Interesting)

Walpurgiss (723989) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757783)

I could have sworn they got in trouble for doing that because while they are tapping, the onstar system is unable to alert authorities to an emergency by its regular, intended, means.

Meaning it can't dial out 911 or whatever if you have a normal emergency, not that the cops listening in couldn't respond.

Re:NASA Automotives (5, Informative)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757479)

Spirit has gone 4.8 miles [wikipedia.org] so far, and Opportunity has gone 7.68 [wikipedia.org] miles.

Re:NASA Automotives (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25757793)

Spirit has gone 4.8 miles [wikipedia.org] so far, and Opportunity has gone 7.68 [wikipedia.org] miles.

+36 Million miles each if you count the commute to work.

Re:NASA Automotives (5, Interesting)

silarulz (1056046) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758429)

During the Lunokhod Programme in the late 60's and early 70's, the two rovers traveled a combined distance of 47kms on the moon! Actually I think one of the rovers still holds the record for the longest traveled distance on any extra-terrestrial planet. And that's in the 70s!

Re:NASA Automotives (3, Informative)

jschen (1249578) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758475)

Never knew about Lunokhod. That's pretty amazing. Of course, the orders of magnitude shorter communications time probably helped a lot.

Re:NASA Automotives (4, Funny)

Dzimas (547818) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757319)

Sure! But be aware that your car will cost $243 million and travel at a maximum speed of 3 mph, while taking up three lanes with its enormous solar wings. Oh, and its only under warranty for three months because of concerns about the unpredictable Terran atmosphere.

Re:NASA Automotives (5, Funny)

rampant mac (561036) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757521)

"...and travel at a maximum speed of 3 mph, while taking up three lanes..."

So, sort of like selling a Cadillac to a senior citizen?

Re:NASA Automotives (3, Funny)

lostmongoose (1094523) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757601)

nah, old people only drive slow when they're in a hurry.

Re:NASA Automotives (5, Funny)

smussman (1160103) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757903)

nah, old people only drive slow when you're in a hurry.

I think this is more accurate.

Re:NASA Automotives (1)

siddesu (698447) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757587)

On the plus side, that'd be cheaper and less bothersome than that other one in the house that I call a "she".

Re:NASA Automotives (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25758453)

You still live with your mother?

Re:NASA Automotives (3, Insightful)

theheadlessrabbit (1022587) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757809)

I'm willing to risk my safety on a metric to standard conversion problem for a car that will run.

um...metric is the standard.

Fail (3, Informative)

dreamchaser (49529) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758413)

Except standard units is another term for US or 'English' [wikipedia.org] units. Your attempt at pedantry fails.

Yes, metric is the accepted international standard. No, what GP referred to was not 'the standard' but what is known as 'standard units'.

Re:Fail (2, Interesting)

heson (915298) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758669)

I realy like the word Imperial better. Including the hillarious "Imperial Metric" where the nuts and bolts are the usual old fractions of inch but are marked in mm.

Re:Fail (5, Informative)

meringuoid (568297) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758929)

I realy like the word Imperial better.

Imperial units, which are used in England, aren't the same as English units, which are used in America. All pints in America are 95ml short, although given what's in them that's probably a mercy.

Re:Fail (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25759067)

unfortunately you're right. but you guy should all be using metrics now >.>

Re:NASA Automotives (2, Funny)

zbharucha (1331473) | more than 5 years ago | (#25759119)

If you're satisfied with travelling a few meters everyday, go get your NASA car!

I'm not dead! (4, Funny)

SuperBanana (662181) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757177)

"I'm getting more charged...I think I'll go for a drive..."

Re:I'm not dead! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25757615)

Nerd: Whoo-hoo-hoo, look who knows so much. It just so happens that your friend here is only MOSTLY dead. There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead is slightly alive. With all dead, well, with all dead there's usually only one thing you can do.

NASA: What's that?

Nerd: Go on slashdot and look for overused cliches

Re:I'm not dead! (3, Funny)

SpaceLifeForm (228190) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757795)

Where do you want to go today?

There is no Vista over there.

Rovers - expected to die before Vista came out.
Vista - not only late but dead before the rovers die.

bellows and a nozzle? (1, Interesting)

TWX (665546) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757217)

Wouldn't sixteenth century technology like a simple bellows with a directable nozzle fix this problem? It doesn't have to be a very powerful or strong bellows, just something good enough to help displace the worst of the dust and fines buildup...

Re:bellows and a nozzle? (5, Interesting)

compro01 (777531) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757249)

It would have to be quite powerful, as as far as I understand, that dust (or the rover, I forget which at the moment) has a fantastic static charge to it, so it requires a potent wind to remove it, which they've been getting on a fortunately regular basis for the past few years.

Re:bellows and a nozzle? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25757253)

like a simple bellows

My understanding is that the atmosphere is so thin, it would have to be enormous to build up enough pressure to actually move the dust. Better to wait for another one of those wind storms to scrub the thing clean.

Or ship the next one with feather dusters ;)

Re:bellows and a nozzle? (5, Informative)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757283)

My understanding: The thing that the designers had decided was that the weight of a dust removal system was not worth removing a scientific instrument to do so, because they had a weight and size budget to deal with. They didn't think there was an effective means to clean the dust to extend the lifetime of the rover vs. less data recovered.

Re:bellows and a nozzle? (1)

TWX (665546) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757451)

Okay, a windshield wiper? Sure, it might start scratching, and it might eventually wear out or get brittle, but if it parked where the wiper blade wasn't under pressure it might last long enough for emergency use like this...

Re:bellows and a nozzle? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25758427)

*sigh* Not only did the NASA/JPL team think of that, but "what about a windshield wiper?" comes up in every single Slashdot thread about a Mars Rover, ever.

Re:bellows and a nozzle? (2, Interesting)

paganizer (566360) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757495)

I came up with two, and submitted them. several layers of very fine film on the panels, when the panels get to 20% efficiency it would automatically fire up the tiny electric motor that would s-l-o-w-l-y peel off the top layer, halting the peeling process whenever efficiency reached whatever is considered adequate.
The other was a little weirder, and I'm not sure i could explain it without several diagrams.

Re:bellows and a nozzle? (2, Interesting)

windsurfer619 (958212) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757661)

Why can't they just flip the panels over?

Re:bellows and a nozzle? (3, Insightful)

Jerry Smith (806480) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758019)

Why can't they just flip the panels over?

If it's staticly charged, flipping won't have the expected result. Plus flipping requires quite some energy (it has to flip back as well), plus we wouldn't want it to get stuck while it's upside-down, would we?

Re:bellows and a nozzle? (2, Interesting)

dgatwood (11270) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758075)

How about the overhead projector roll system. On one edge of the panel, you put a a roll of clear plastic cellophane (or thicker plastic in all likelihood, but you get the idea). On the opposite edge, you attach the cellophane to a take-up roll. You place a track along the other two edges to hold the film against the panel's surface. When things get too dusty, you run the motors and expose a new section of the film.

Better yet, just include a couple of capacitors and a fine wire mesh on the surface of the panel. When it gets too dusty, bring the mesh up to a high voltage and hold it there for a while. Next, charge up the capacitors with a high voltage of the opposite polarity. Suddenly cut power to the mesh and dump the opposite charge into the mesh. The dust should jump off faster than a mortgage broker on the roof of an investment bank the day after Lehman Brothers went belly up.

Too soon?

Re:bellows and a nozzle? (1)

ledow (319597) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758519)

So you're adding a motor, including cabling and control, plus rolls of film which would have to be designed properly to not block out too much light to the solar panel in the first place (UV-translucent etc.), you would have gears, etc. possibly in an exposed martian dusty atmosphere but they only get used, say, once a month. And you expect this motor/gearing to start up and work first time every time when it's caked in dust, or provide some sort of shielding that is "dust-proof" but also allows the film to move smoothly through it and, presumbly, "out" of something like a spindle the other end, when it's caked in dust that you've just shoved towards the spindle.

You've added so many moving parts and complications it would actually have been easier to just fit a mechanism to spray some Windowlene on it...

Re:bellows and a nozzle? (1)

Idiomatick (976696) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757837)

It doesn't matter it has survived 20times longer then it was meant to have...

Re:bellows and a nozzle? (1)

ledow (319597) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758557)

I just gave this whole thing ten minutes thought because of this thread - damn you and your ridiculous suggestions.

My suggestion would have been to have a non-flat solar panel in the first place - one made up of 3D "pyramids" of mini triangular solar panels joined together, a bit like the shape of that reflector that they put on the moon, so that you catch light coming in from virtually any angle but have a non-flat sheet-like panel. I don't know if you'd get "more" power because of the greater surface area, at the expense of a greater "height" but it seems likely.

Then in the bottom, where each "pyramid" of panels meets another, a small hole for loose dust to drain through. That probably wouldn't do much on it's own, because the dust isn't all loose, but I'd have a "shaker" mechanism, probably just an extension of the motor systems or even just using the bumpy surface of Mars itself.

Then, whenever the rover moved, the dust would have somewhere to "fall" off the panels, there are no horizontal surfaces for it to cling too (the sloped sides of all the pyramids would help the dust slide off, I assume, a bit like flat roofs vs peaked roofs). Moving parts are kept to a minimum above what's *already* moving (which also means no extra power is required), you might end up with a greater power capacity because of surface area, the panels would be modular and thus less prone to total failure, angle of light coming into the panel wouldn't be as much as factor, so it might be able to collect more light at sunrise/sunset, and (hopefully) dust would be less of a problem.

If you did it right, you could still have quite a thin sheet of "bumpy pyramid" panels doing the job, although I imagine the wiring between them may be more complex. There's probably a million and one problems with this idea, too, because it took me ten minutes to think up and wasn't going to cost me millions of dollars if it had problems.

Re:bellows and a nozzle? (4, Interesting)

ledow (319597) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758673)

Just to give some sense of the scale of the problem:

http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA03272 [nasa.gov] http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA10128 - dirty solar panels.

Bring out your rovers! (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25757219)

I'm not dead yet.....

Obligatory (1)

Normal Dan (1053064) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757373)

Still Alive [youtube.com]

And God Says... (1)

davidphogan74 (623610) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757443)

You damned mammals, you've done it!

Re:And God Says... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25757487)

Planet of the Mammals?

You damned dirty endoskeletonites!

3 Mars Rovers (1)

Dogun (7502) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757465)

These little guys really cheer me up some days.

Re:3 Mars Rovers (2, Funny)

Dogun (7502) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757475)

that was supposed to be a <3.

Re:3 Mars Rovers (2, Interesting)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757527)

that was supposed to be a <3.

Sojourner might still be operating.

Re:3 Mars Rovers (1)

Dogun (7502) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757537)

Right, I get that. I just meant, you know. <3, as in an ascii heart.

Maybe it wasn't such a bad slip-up.

Re:3 Mars Rovers (1)

naz404 (1282810) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758151)

Eh? I thought 3 was ASCII for asshat...

Re:3 Mars Rovers (2, Funny)

FireFury03 (653718) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758381)

Right, I get that. I just meant, you know. <3, as in an ascii heart.

Looks like a pair of testicles to me...

Re:3 Mars Rovers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25758507)

... with a birthday hat

links... (4, Informative)

sraviik (1375785) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757481)

Ummm (1, Interesting)

NotQuiteReal (608241) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757583)

I hate to ask, but is it doing any useful science anymore?

We already know the "three month" mission has stretched to 5 years, so I assume the budget has stretched too.

If it is still doing something useful, fine, but if money is being spent just to see how much longer it will "live", it doesn't sound cost effective.

Re:Ummm (5, Funny)

Kell Bengal (711123) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757611)

It's doing science and it's still alive.

Re:Ummm (1)

Knara (9377) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757665)

Bravo.

Just... bravo.

Re:Ummm (3, Funny)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758281)

Which means it is neither pining for the chasmata nor is it pushing up the regolith...

Re:Ummm (4, Insightful)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757701)

I hate to ask, but is it doing any useful science anymore?

Even if it is still doing the same science year after year it can deliver information on longer term changes in the environment on Mars. A five year perspective is much more than 20 times more valuable than a three month perspective.

Re:Ummm (1)

DogDude (805747) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757711)

Your signature is pretty ironic considering what you posted. Some things are more important than money. The sheer scientific coolness of this achievement is reason enough to keep the project going.

Re:Ummm (5, Insightful)

east coast (590680) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757717)

Isn't seeing how much longer it will live and the problems it will have just as much science as anything it's doing related to Mars?

Consider that the powers that be decided that the price tag associated with these two gizmos was worth it for the three months worth of science they were going to get out of them. Now that they've lasted roughly 20 times as long that means something went really right, the return on investment is definitely there. But it's just as important to know what they could do better. What are the weaknesses of the system? What systems upheld the best? These systems aren't mass produced like your auto, knowing what is effective and what isn't is just as much science as their original mission. And with the data that we're collecting we're going to make better probes in the future. That's worth the money too.

And yes, I'm sure that they're still doing science based on their original mission too. They have an ability to see things from a point of view we may not see for many more years to come. May as well get what we can while we can.

Re:Ummm (1)

TheDarkMaster (1292526) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758727)

I really agree. Is a much valuable info know what design worked or not, the good and the bad ideas with a long endurance test on hostile environtment.

Re:Ummm (3, Informative)

wvmarle (1070040) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757769)

I'm quite sure that about 95% of the cost of the two rovers has been the building and actually launching them all the way to Mars. Now the rovers themselves do not cost extra money, only the salaries of the scientists operating them. Extending the life of these rovers is for sure more cost-effective than sending a new one. Even if the new one comes with upgraded or different instruments.

Re:Ummm (1)

Icarium (1109647) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758333)

It's not like they're flying engineers and spare parts out to Mars, is it? So yes, while extending the mission has probably increased the spending on the project, most of that spending will be going into crunching additional data - the actual cost of keeping the rover up and running is minimal at this point.

Re:Ummm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25758981)

Heck, yes. The last few weeks, well, there's been minimal data collection (or transmission of it) by Spirit, because there hasn't been enough power. But up until that point it was still collecting away, and trying to climb up onto an outcrop of sedimentary rock that has been only partially investigated. Opportunity is still collecting good data, and only towards the end of the mission did it finally reach Victoria crater, which had spectacular cliff outcrops which revealed deeper structures than had been observed at any prior site.

Not dead yet (3, Funny)

kingramon0 (411815) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757639)

I guess it was just a flesh wound.

Re:Not dead yet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25757951)

Come back and I bite your knee cups away!

Alas, nobody thought about "solar panel wipers"?

Re:Not dead yet (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25758583)

Alas, nobody actually reads "the article" or "the comments".

Re:Not dead yet (1)

Quasimodem (719423) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758041)

Mars Exploration Rover Spirit: "The reports of my death were greatly exaggerated."

It is not Mars Rovers (1, Funny)

pirot (894930) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757651)

Martians are sending the signals!

Re:It is not Mars Rovers (5, Funny)

coxymla (1372369) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757765)

Can't be, the chances of anything like that coming from Mars are a million to one!

MOD parent up. (0, Redundant)

TapeCutter (624760) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757959)

...and chop a couple of digits of his uid for that reference.

Tag (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25758197)

piningforthefjords

Ugh! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25758611)

If this Palin prototype can last this long on Mars, imagine how long the new model might be around :(

She's talking! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25758757)

'She's talking!'

The hard part is getting her to shut up!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>