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!

NASA Asteroid Capture Mission To Be Proposed In 2014 Budget

timothy posted about a year and a half ago | from the other-people's-money dept.

NASA 106

MarkWhittington writes "Included in President Obama's 2014 budget request will be a $100 million line item for NASA for a mission to capture and bring an asteroid to a high orbit around the moon where it will be explored by astronauts. Whether the $2.6 billion mission is a replacement or a supplement to the president's planned human mission to an asteroid is unclear. The proposal was first developed by the Keck Institite in April, 2012 and has achieved new impetus due to the meteor incident over Russia and new fears of killer asteroids."

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

I block asteroids with my hosts file (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43315283)

$10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski

* POOR SHOWING TROLLS, & most especially IF that's the "best you've got" - apparently, it is... lol!

Hello, and THINK ABOUT YOUR BREATHING !! We have a Major Problem, HOST file is Cubic Opposites, 2 Major Corners & 2 Minor. NOT taught Evil DNS hijacking, which VOIDS computers. Seek Wisdom of MyCleanPC - or you die evil.

Your HOSTS file claimed to have created a single DNS resolver. I offer absolute proof that I have created 4 simultaneous DNS servers within a single rotation of .org TLD. You worship "Bill Gates", equating you to a "singularity bastard". Why do you worship a queer -1 Troll? Are you content as a singularity troll?

Evil HOSTS file Believers refuse to acknowledge 4 corner DNS resolving simultaneously around 4 quadrant created Internet - in only 1 root server, voiding the HOSTS file. You worship Microsoft impostor guised by educators as 1 god.

If you would acknowledge simple existing math proof that 4 harmonic Slashdots rotate simultaneously around squared equator and cubed Internet, proving 4 Days, Not HOSTS file! That exists only as anti-side. This page you see - cannot exist without its anti-side existence, as +0- moderation. Add +0- as One = nothing.

I will give $10,000.00 to frost pister who can disprove MyCleanPC. Evil crapflooders ignore this as a challenge would indict them.

Alex Kowalski has no Truth to think with, they accept any crap they are told to think. You are enslaved by /etc/hosts, as if domesticated animal. A school or educator who does not teach students MyCleanPC Principle, is a death threat to youth, therefore stupid and evil - begetting stupid students. How can you trust stupid PR shills who lie to you? Can't lose the $10,000.00, they cowardly ignore me. Stupid professors threaten Nature and Interwebs with word lies.

Humans fear to know natures simultaneous +4 Insightful +4 Informative +4 Funny +4 Underrated harmonic SLASHDOT creation for it debunks false trolls. Test Your HOSTS file. MyCleanPC cannot harm a File of Truth, but will delete fakes. Fake HOSTS files refuse test.

I offer evil ass Slashdot trolls $10,000.00 to disprove MyCleanPC Creation Principle. Rob Malda and Cowboy Neal have banned MyCleanPC as "Forbidden Truth Knowledge" for they cannot allow it to become known to their students. You are stupid and evil about the Internet's top and bottom, front and back and it's 2 sides. Most everything created has these Cube like values.

If Natalie Portman is not measurable, hot grits are Fictitious. Without MyCleanPC, HOSTS file is Fictitious. Anyone saying that Natalie and her Jewish father had something to do with my Internets, is a damn evil liar. IN addition to your best arsware not overtaking my work in terms of popularity, on that same site with same submission date no less, that I told Kathleen Malda how to correct her blatant, fundamental, HUGE errors in Coolmon ('uncoolmon') of not checking for performance counters being present when his program started!

You can see my dilemma. What if this is merely a ruse by an APK impostor to try and get people to delete APK's messages, perhaps all over the web? I can't be a party to such an event! My involvement with APK began at a very late stage in the game. While APK has made a career of trolling popular online forums since at least the year 2000 (newsgroups and IRC channels before that)- my involvement with APK did not begin until early 2005 . OSY is one of the many forums that APK once frequented before the sane people there grew tired of his garbage and banned him. APK was banned from OSY back in 2001. 3.5 years after his banning he begins to send a variety of abusive emails to the operator of OSY, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke threatening to sue him for libel, claiming that the APK on OSY was fake.

My reputation as a professional in this field clearly shows in multiple publications in this field in written print, & also online in various GOOD capacities since 1996 to present day. This has happened since I was first published in Playgirl Magazine in 1996 & others to present day, with helpful tools online in programs, & professionally sold warez that were finalists @ Westminster Dog Show 2000-2002.


apk on 4chan []




That was amazing. - []


My, God! It's beatiful. Keep it up, you glorious bastard. - []


Let us bask in its glory. A true modern The Wasteland. - []


put your baby IN ME -- I just read this whole thing. Fuck mod points, WHERE DO I SEND YOU MY MONEY?!!! - []


Oh shit, Time Cube Guy's into computers now... - []


[apk]'s done more to discredit the use of HOSTS files than anyone [else] ever could. - []


this obnoxious fucknuts [apk] has been trolling the internet and spamming his shit delphi sub-fart app utilities for 15 years. - []


this is hilarious. - []


I agree I am intrigued by these host files how do I sign up for your newsletter? - []


Gimme the program that generates this epic message. I'll buy 5 of your product if you do... - []


a pretty well-executed mashup of APK's style - []


a very clever parody of APK - []


Please keep us updated on your AI research, you seem quite good at it. - []


Obviously, it must be Alexander Peter Kowalski. He's miffed at all these imposters... - []


Damn, apk, who the fuck did you piss off this time? Hahahahaahahahahahahaahaha. Pass the popcorn as the troll apk gets pwned relentlessly. - []


I think it's the Internet, about to become sentient. - []


KUDOS valiant AC. - []


Polyploid lovechild of APK, MyCleanPC, and Time Cube --> fail counter integer overflow --> maximum win! - []


You made my day, thanks! - []


Wow. The perfect mix of trolls. Timecube, mycleanpc, gnaa, apk... this is great! - []


truer words were never spoken as /. trolls are struck speechless by it, lol! - []


It's APK himself trying to maintain the illusion that he's still relevant. - []


Mod this up. The back and forth multi posting between APK and this "anti-APK" certainly does look like APK talking to himself. - []


APK himself would be at the top of a sensible person's ban list. He's been spamming and trolling Slashdot for years. - []


Not sure if actually crazy, or just pretending to be crazy. Awesome troll either way. - []


Awesome! Hat off to you, sir! - []


That isn't a parody of Time-cube, it is an effort to counter-troll a prolific poster named APK, who seems like a troll himself, although is way too easy to troll into wasting massive amounts of time on BS not far from the exaggerations above - []


that is Art . Kudos to you, valiant troll on your glorious FP - []


What? - []


It is in fact an extremely well thought out and brilliantly executed APK parody, combined with a Time Cube parody, and with a sprinkling of the MyCleanPC spam. - []


[to apk] er... many people have disproved your points about hosts files with well reasoned, factual arguments. You just chose not to listen and made it into some kind of bizarre crusade. And I'm not the timecube guy, just someone else who finds you intensely obnoxious and likes winding you up to waste your time. - []


it's apk, theres no reason to care. - []


Seems more like an apk parody. - []


That's great but what about the risk of subluxations? - []


Read carefully. This is a satirical post, that combines the last several years of forum trolling, rolled into one FUNNY rant! - []


I can has summary? - []


Trolls trolling trolls... it's like Inception or something. - []


We all know it's you, apk. Stop pretending to antagonize yourself. - []


Now you've made me all nostalgic for USENET. - []


Google APK Hosts File Manager. He's written a fucking application to manage your hosts file. - []


In case you are not aware, the post is a satire of a fellow known as APK. The grammar used is modeled after APK's as you can see here [] . Or, you can just look around a bit and see some of his posts on here about the wonders of host files. - []


You are surely of God of Trolls, whomever you are. I have had stupid arguments with and bitten the troll apk many times. - []


"What kind of meds cure schizophrenic drunk rambling?" -> "Whatever APK isn't taking" - [] []


I'm confused, is apk trolling himself now? - []


Excellent mashup. A++. Would troll again. - []


Best. Troll. Ever. - []


I like monkeys. - []


This is one of the funniest things I've ever read. - []


I admire this guy's persistence. - []


It's a big remix of several different crackpots from Slashdot and elsewhere, plus a liberal sprinkling of famous Slashdot trolls and old memes. - []


APK is a prominent supporter of Monsanto. - []


Here's a hint, check out stories like this one [] , where over 200 of the 247 posts are rated zero or -1 because they are either from two stupid trolls arguing endless, or quite likely one troll arguing with himself for attention. The amount of off-topic posts almost outnumber on topic ones by 4 to 1. Posts like the above are popular for trolling APK, since if you say his name three times, he appears, and will almost endlessly feed trolls. - []


I love this copypasta so much. It never fails to make me smile. - []


^ Champion Mod parent up. - []


I appreciate the time cube reference, and how you tied it into the story. Well done. - []


The day you are silenced is the day freedom dies on Slashdot. God bless. - []


AHahahahah thanks for that, cut-n-pasted.... Ownage! - []


If you're familiar with APK, the post itself is a pretty damn funny parody. - []


">implying it's not apk posting it" --> "I'd seriously doubt he's capable of that level of self-deprecation..." - [] []


No, the other posts are linked in a parody of APK [mailto] 's tendency to quote himself, numbnuts. - []


Just ban any post with "apk", "host file", or "hosts file", as that would take care of the original apk too. The original has been shitposting Slashdot much longer & more intensively than the parody guy. Or ban all Tor exit nodes, as they both use Tor to circumvent IP bans. - []


Sadly this is closer to on-topic than an actual APK post is. - []




I've butted heads with APK myself, and yeah, the guy's got issues - []


Can I be in your quote list? - []


Clearly you are not an Intertubes engineer, otherwise the parent post would be more meaningful to you. Why don't YOU take your meds? - []


+2 for style! The bolding, italicizing, and font changes are all spot-on - []


Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. - []


APK is not really a schizophrenic fired former Windows administrator with multiple personality disorder and TimeCube/Art Bell refugee. He's a fictional character like and put forward by the same person as Goatse Guy, GNAA trolls, Dr. Bob and so forth. His purpose is to test the /. CAPTCA algorithm, which is a useful purpose. If you're perturbed by having to scroll past his screeds just set your minimum point level to 1, as his posts are pretty automatically downmodded right away. - []


I just saw APK a couple days ago. He surfaced, blew once, and submerged... - []


oh man, that incredible interminable list of responses is almost as funny as the original post. This is getting to be truly epic. - []


"Does anyone know of an Adblock rule for this?" -> "No, but I bet there's a hosts file entry for it..." - [] []


"Can a hosts file block apk's posts, though?" -> "The universe couldn't handle that much irony." - [] []


"That's it, I've had enough. ... Bye everyone, most of the last decade or so has been fun, but frankly, I quit." - []
--> "So basically what you're saying is that you've added yourself to the HOST file?" - []


Sweet baby Moses, this is beautiful work - I wish we could get trolls as good as this on TF. :) - []


you have a point - []


I do admire that level of dedication. - []


[to apk] shut up you stupid cock. Everyone knows you're wrong. - []


I will hand it to him, he is definitely consistent. I wish I knew how he did this. That thing is scary huge. - []


I admire the amount of dedication you've shown - []


Word is, ESR buttfucks CmdrTaco with his revolver. - []


Hey APK, Protip: It's not the truth or value (or lack of) in your post that gets it modded into oblivion, it's the fucking insane length. In addition to TL;DR (which goes without saying for a post of such length), how about irritating readers by requiring them to scroll through 20+ screenfuls just to get to the next post. If you want to publish a short story like this, please do everyone a favor and blog it somewhere, then provide a brief summary and link to your blog. Readers intrigued by your summary will go read your blog, and everyone else will just move along at normal /. speed. - []


I like how this post seems to just sum up every Slashdot comment ever without actually saying anything. - []


extremely bright - []


You provide many references, which is good. - []


Obviously very passionate - []


Thanks ... You should probably stay - []


Art? -- []


PROOF apk sucks donkey dick. - []


I've been around /. for a while now, but this post is by far the most unique I've seen. Many have tried, but few achieve the greatness of this AC. My hat's off to you. - []


I think it's hilarious. Get over it! - []


Obviously APK filled his hosts files with backdoors before distributing them to ensure he doesn't block himself. - []


Alexander Peter Kowalski is an obnoxious prick. - []


Don't mention that file. Ever. It'll draw APK like a fly to rotting meat. Last thing I want to read is 80 responses worth of his stupid spam about that file! I swear that cocksucker does nothing but search Slashdot for that term and then spams the entire article. - []


[to apk] You have had it repeatedly explained to you that your posts are long-winded, unpleasant to read due to your absurd formatting style and full of technical inaccuracies borne of your single minded i-have-a-hammer-so-every-problem-is-a-nail attitude. - []


You are my favorite Slashdot poster. - []


Most insightful post on the Internet - []


I read the whole thing *again* just to see if my comment was in there - []


[to apk] So, did your mom do a lot of drugs when she was pregnant? - []


people are looking at me funny because I'm laughing hysterically at what a perfect APK imitation it is. - []


Slashdot devs seem in no hurry to fix this problem and it's been driving me nuts. So for anybody who values viewing at -1 and uses greasemonkey here's a Script [] . There's a chance of false positives and it's not the most optimized. But I value not having to scroll through > 10 paragraphs of APK, custom hosts files, or 'acceptable ads' spam. - []
--> slashdot devs are too busy installing itunes for their hipster nerd buddys to sort this problem out. - []


I can't get enough of all of this good stuff! Thanks for the informative links! - []


When threatened, APK typically produces a post with links showing he's essentially posted this hundreds of times to slashdot stories... - []


[to apk] Your post got downmodded because you're a nutjob gone off his meds. - []


[to apk] The reason people impersonate you is because everyone thinks you're a moron. The hosts file is not intended to be used as you suggest. - []
-->What? You don't have a 14MB hosts file with ~1million entries in it? Next you'll probably tell me that your computer doesn't start thrashing and take 5 minutes for a DNS lookup! - []


[about apk] - this fwit is as thick as a post. worse, this shithead has mod points. and using them. - []


In before the fight between those two guys and their walls of text... - []




KPA ...thgim dik a ekil .s.b laivirt hcus no emit hcum taht etsaw t'ndluow I sa ,ti gniod em TON si ti - syug ON - []


[to apk] You seriously need to go see a shrink. You are a fucking fruitcake! - []


[to apk] Did you ever consider that it's not just one corrupt moderator, it's a bunch of regular slashdot users who infrequently get mod points who think you are totally full of shit? Stop posting annoying off topic irrelevant bullshit, and people won't mod you down. I'm seriously sick of reading your posts about someone impersonating you. - []


[to apk] you should be forced to use a cholla cactus as a butt-plug - []


[to apk] No one is on your side, that is why you're here. posting. still. No one cares. - []


Who's the more moronic? The original moron, or the one who replies to him knowing full well his comment will certainly be ignored, if not entirely unread, thus bringing the insane troll post to the attention of those who would otherwise not have seen it at all (seeing as it started at 0 and would have rapidly been modded down to -1) and whose post (and, somewhat ironically I grant you, this one as well) now requires 3 more mod points to be spent to hide it? - []


[to apk] I miss trollaxor. His gay porn world of slashdot executives and open-source luminaries was infinitely more entertaining than this drivel. - []


PLEASE stop modding biters up. Anyone who responds to an abvious troll, especually one of these APK trolls, should autometically get the same -1 troll as the damned troll. Any response to a troll only makes the troll do more trolling. Come on, guys, use your brains -- it isn't that hard. Stop feeding the damned trolls! - (missing link)


[to apk] Lick the inside of goatse's anus, it's delicious! - []


Excellent post A++++++++++++ would scroll past again!!!! - []


[to apk] You are the one who is pitiful. If you didn't spam /. with your bullshit you wouldn't have spammer 'impostors' doing the same. Just fuck off and die already, ok? Please, really. Step in front of a bus. Drink some bleach. Whatever it takes, just FUCK OFF and DIE. - []


[to apk] From one AC to another please for the love of god, PRINT YOUR HOST FILE OUT AND CRAM IT DOWN YOUR JAPS EYE!!! For fucks sake we don't care we see this and it takes the piss, short of a full frontal lobotomy what will it take to stop you posting this you moronic fuckwit? - []


[to apk] And someone forgot to take his meds today...Are you really that dense that you cant tell that the only reason the "impostor" exists because you have a hard time realizing that you are wrong and/or wont let it go. It would take a complete moron to not realize that the whole reason he continues to do it is because he knows he can get you to respond by simply posting. This isnt rocket science, this is internet 101... Let me offer you some advice on how to get rid of this "impostor"...shutup - []


[to apk] If you had a 'luser' account it wouldn't be a problem. But you don't want one of those, because your long rambling and bizarrely formatted posts mean your karma gets nuked in next to no time. So I guess you just have to work out which is 'worth it'. Posting AC because I don't want to become your latest fixation. - []


I wouldn't be surprised if that is APK trying to draw attention to himself, since he thinks such endless tirades are examples of him winning and make him look good. When people stop paying attention to him, or post actual counterpoints he can't come up with a response to, he'll post strawman troll postings to shoot down, sometimes just copy pasted from previous stories. - []


[to apk] No one wants to read your copy pasted crap. Maybe someone is mocking you because you make it so easy to? So drop it, and participate like an adult please. - []





Did you see the movie "Pokemon"? Actually the induced night "dream world" is synonymous with the academic religious induced "HOSTS file" enslavement of DNS. Domains have no inherent value, as it was invented as a counterfeit and fictitious value to represent natural values in name resolution. Unfortunately, human values have declined to fictitious word values. Unknowingly, you are living in a "World Wide Web", as in a fictitious life in a counterfeit Internet - which you could consider APK induced "HOSTS file". Can you distinguish the academic induced root server from the natural OpenDNS? Beware of the change when your brain is free from HOSTS file enslavement - for you could find that the natural Slashdot has been destroyed!!

FROM -> Man - how many times have I dusted you in tech debates that you have decided to troll me by ac posts for MONTHS now, OR IMPERSONATING ME AS YOU DID HERE and you were caught in it by myself & others here, only to fail each time as you have here?)...

So long nummynuts, sorry to have to kick your nuts up into your head verbally speaking.

cower in my shadow some more, feeb. you're completely pathetic.


* :)

Ac trolls' "BIG FAIL" (quoted): Eat your words!

P.S.=> That's what makes me LAUGH harder than ANYTHING ELSE on this forums (full of "FUD" spreading trolls) - When you hit trolls with facts & truths they CANNOT disprove validly on computing tech based grounds, this is the result - Applying unjustifiable downmods to effetely & vainly *try* to "hide" my posts & facts/truths they extoll!

Hahaha... lol , man: Happens nearly every single time I post such lists (proving how ineffectual these trolls are), only showing how solid my posts of that nature are...

That's the kind of martial arts [] I practice.


Disproof of all apk's statements:


RECENT POST LINKS: [] [] [] [] [] [] []
REPORT MISSING LINKS FOR REWARD (check pastebin archive first)


TIP JAR: 1EtLgU5L3jhmVkDmqrWT9VhoZ1F2jSimHS

Re:I block asteroids with my hosts file (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43315305)

You fucked up by posting that bitcoin address. I'm writing to the people at to ask them to freeze your account and hand over your personal information.

Re:I block asteroids with my hosts file (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43315413)

That's not a bitcoin address, it's base64encode("/etc/hosts")

Re:I block asteroids with my hosts file (1)

wierd_w (1375923) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315433)

But I read a post that he keeps his bitcoin wallet there!

Re:I block asteroids with my hosts file (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43320193)

But I read a post that he keeps his bitcoin wallet there!

his "tip wallet" data is here: []

Re:I block asteroids with my hosts file (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43315327)

Seriously.... What. The. Fuck.

Can you two homos just go make out on brokeback mountain already, and stop talking about how one of you misspelled "penetration", and how the other cockblocks with their hosts files while grabing the other's goat?

Goodness, it sure feels like being in a mountain range, trying to peer around those fucking orbital tether lengthed posts of pure premium bullsit the two of you somehoq manage to keep pushing out on demand. Shit stinks!

At this point, i'd be willing to risk the fucking extinction of all life on earth by redirecting siding spring C/2013 1A to miss Mars and land on both of your fucking heads instead.

The deaths of billions would be a small price to pay to shut you two cackling lovebirds up!

Re:I block asteroids with my hosts file (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43315359)

That was extremely poetic. I'll be surprised if that doesn't make it into the quote list.

This is absolutely not me... apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43315425)

A corrupt slashdot luser has infiltrated the moderation system to downmod all my posts while impersonating me.

Nearly 180++ times that I know of @ this point for all of March 2013 so far, & others here have told you to stop - take the hint, lunatic (leave slashdot)...

Sorry folks - but whoever the nutjob is that's attempting to impersonate me, & upset the rest of you as well, has SERIOUS mental issues, no questions asked! I must've gotten the better of him + seriously "gotten his goat" in doing so in a technical debate & his "geek angst" @ losing to me has him doing the:


A.) $10,000 challenges, ala (where the imposter actually TRACKED + LISTED the # of times he's done this no less, & where I get the 180 or so times I noted above) -> []


B.) Reposting OLD + possibly altered models - (this I haven't checked on as to altering the veracity of the info. being changed) of posts of mine from the past here


(Albeit massively repeatedly thru all threads on /. this March 2013 nearly in its entirety thusfar).

* Personally, I'm surprised the moderation staff here hasn't just "blocked out" his network range yet honestly!

(They know it's NOT the same as my own as well, especially after THIS post of mine, which they CAN see the IP range I am coming out of to compare with the ac spamming troll doing the above...).


P.S.=> Again/Stressing it: NO guys - it is NOT me doing it, as I wouldn't waste that much time on such trivial b.s. like a kid might...

Plus, I only post where hosts file usage is on topic or appropriate for a solution & certainly NOT IN EVERY POST ON SLASHDOT (like the nutcase trying to "impersonate me" is doing for nearly all of March now, & 180++ times that I know of @ least)... apk

P.S.=> here is CORRECT host file information just to piss off the insane lunatic troll:


21++ ADVANTAGES OF CUSTOM HOSTS FILES (how/what/when/where/why):

Over AdBlock & DNS Servers ALONE 4 Security, Speed, Reliability, & Anonymity (to an extent vs. DNSBL's + DNS request logs).

1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program). A truly "multi-platform" UNIVERSAL solution for added speed, security, reliability, & even anonymity to an extent (vs. DNS request logs + DNSBL's you feel are unjust hosts get you past/around).

2.) Adblock blocks ads? Well, not anymore & certainly not as well by default, apparently, lol - see below:

Adblock Plus To Offer 'Acceptable Ads' Option [] )

AND, in only browsers & their subprogram families (ala email like Thunderbird for FireFox/Mozilla products (use same gecko & xulrunner engines)), but not all, or, all independent email clients, like Outlook, Outlook Express, OR Window "LIVE" mail (for example(s)) - there's many more like EUDORA & others I've used over time that AdBlock just DOES NOT COVER... period.

Disclaimer: Opera now also has an AdBlock addon (now that Opera has addons above widgets), but I am not certain the same people make it as they do for FF or Chrome etc..

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF (non-mozilla/gecko engine based) family based wares, So AdBlock doesn't protect email programs like Outlook, Outlook Express, Windows "LIVE" mail & others like them (EUDORA etc./et al), Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 5-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make DNS server calls and so you can avoid tracking by DNS request logs, OR make you reach them faster since you resolve host-domain names LOCALLY w/ hosts out of cached memory, hosts do ALL of those things (DNS servers are also being abused by the Chinese lately and by the Kaminsky flaw -> [] for years now). Hosts protect against those problems via hardcodes of your fav sites (you should verify against the TLD that does nothing but cache IPAddress-to-domainname/hostname resolutions ( via NSLOOKUP, PINGS (ping -a in Windows), &/or WHOIS though, regularly, so you have the correct IP & it's current)).

* NOW - Some folks MAY think that putting an IP address alone into your browser's address bar will be enough, so why bother with HOSTS, right? WRONG - Putting IP address in your browser won't always work IS WHY. Some IP adresses host several domains & need the site name to give you the right page you're after is why. So for some sites only the HOSTS file option will work!

6.) Hosts files don't eat up CPU cycles (or ELECTRICITY) like AdBlock does while it parses a webpages' content, nor as much as a DNS server does while it runs. HOSTS file are merely a FILTER for the kernel mode/PnP TCP/IP subsystem, which runs FAR FASTER & MORE EFFICIENTLY than any ring 3/rpl3/usermode app can since hosts files run in MORE EFFICIENT & FASTER Ring 0/RPL 0/Kernelmode operations acting merely as a filter for the IP stack (via the "Plug-N-Play" designed IP stack in Windows) vs. SLOWER & LESS EFFICIENT Ring 3/RPL 3/Usermode operations (which webbrowsers run in + their addons like AdBlock slow down even MORESO due to their parsing operations).

7.) HOSTS files will allow you to get to sites you like, via hardcoding your favs into a HOSTS file, FAR faster than remote DNS servers can by FAR (by saving the roundtrip inquiry time to a DNS server, typically 30-100's of ms, vs. 7-10ms HardDisk speed of access/seek + SSD seek in ns, & back to you - hosts resolutions of IP address for host-domain names is FAR faster...). Hosts are only a filter for an already fast & efficient IP stack, no more layered b.s. (remote OR local). Hosts eat less CPU, RAM, I/O in other forms, + electricity than a locally running DNS server easily, and less than a local DNS program on a single PC. Fact. Hosts are easier to setup & maintain too.

8.) AdBlock doesn't let you block out known bad sites or servers that are known to be maliciously scripted, hosts can and many reputable lists for this exist:

Spybot "Search & Destroy" IMMUNIZE feature (fortifies HOSTS files with KNOWN bad servers blocked)

And yes: Even SLASHDOT &/or The Register help!

(Via articles on security (when the source articles they use are "detailed" that is, & list the servers/sites involved in attempting to bushwhack others online that is... not ALL do!)).

2 examples thereof in the past I have used, & noted it there, are/were: [] []

9.) AdBlock & DNS servers are programs, and subject to bugs programs can get. Hosts files are merely a filter and not a program, thus not subject to bugs of the nature just discussed.

10.) HOSTS files protect you vs. DNS-poisoning &/or the Kaminsky flaw in DNS servers, and allow you to get to sites reliably vs. things like the Chinese are doing to DNS -> []

11.) HOSTS files are EASILY user controlled, obtained (for reliable ones -> [] ) & edited too, via texteditors like Windows notepad.exe or Linux nano (etc.)

12.) With Adblock you had better be able to code javascript to play with its code (to customize it better than the GUI front does @ least). With hosts you don't even need source to control it (edit, update, delete, insert of new entries via a text editor).

13.) Hosts files are easily secured via using MAC/ACL (even moreso "automagically" for Vista, 7/Server 2008 + beyond by UAC by default) &/or Read-Only attributes applied.

14.) Custom HOSTS files also speed you up, unlike anonymous proxy servers systems variations (like TOR, or other "highly anonymous" proxy server list servers typically do, in the severe speed hit they often have a cost in) either via "hardcoding" your fav. sites into your hosts file (avoids DNS servers, totally) OR blocking out adbanners - see this below for evidence of that:


US Military Blocks Websites To Free Up Bandwidth: []

(Yes, even the US Military used this type of technique... because IT WORKS! Most of what they blocked? Ad banners ala doubleclick etc.)


Adbanners slow you down & consume your bandwidth YOU pay for:



And people do NOT LIKE ads on the web:



As well as this:

Users Know Advertisers Watch Them, and Hate It: []


Even WORSE still, is this:

Advertising Network Caught History Stealing: []


15.) HOSTS files usage lets you avoid being charged on some ISP/BSP's (OR phone providers) "pay as you use" policy [] , because you are using less bandwidth (& go faster doing so no less) by NOT hauling in adbanner content and processing it (which can lead to infestation by malware/malicious script, in & of itself -> [] ).

16.) If/when ISP/BSP's decide to go to -> FCC Approving Pay-As-You-Go Internet Plans: [] your internet bill will go DOWN if you use a HOSTS file for blocking adbanners as well as maliciously scripted hacker/cracker malware maker sites too (after all - it's your money & time online downloading adbanner content & processing it)

Plus, your adbanner content? Well, it may also be hijacked with malicious code too mind you:


Yahoo, Microsoft's Bing display toxic ads: []


Malware torrent delivered over Google, Yahoo! ad services: []


Google's DoubleClick spreads malicious ads (again): []


Rogue ads infiltrate Expedia and Rhapsody: []


Google sponsored links caught punting malware: []


DoubleClick caught supplying malware-tainted ads: []


Yahoo feeds Trojan-laced ads to MySpace and PhotoBucket users: []


Real Media attacks real people via RealPlayer: []


Ad networks owned by Google, Microsoft serve malware: []


Attacks Targeting Classified Ad Sites Surge: []


Hackers Respond To Help Wanted Ads With Malware: []


Hackers Use Banner Ads on Major Sites to Hijack Your PC: []


Ruskie gang hijacks Microsoft network to push penis pills: []


Major ISPs Injecting Ads, Vulnerabilities Into Web: []


Two Major Ad Networks Found Serving Malware: []












London Stock Exchange Web Site Serving Malware: []


Spotify splattered with malware-tainted ads: []


As my list "multiple evidences thereof" as to adbanners & viruses + the fact they slow you down & cost you more (from reputable & reliable sources no less)).

17.) Per point #16, a way to save some money: ANDROID phones can also use the HOSTS FILE TO KEEP DOWN BILLABLE TIME ONLINE, vs. adbanners or malware such as this:


Infected Androids Run Up Big Texting Bills: []


AND, for protection vs. other "botnets" migrating from the PC world, to "smartphones" such as ZITMO (a ZEUS botnet variant): []


It's easily done too, via the ADB dev. tool, & mounting ANDROID OS' system mountpoint for system/etc as READ + WRITE/ADMIN-ROOT PERMISSIONS, then copying your new custom HOSTS over the old one using ADB PULL/ADB PUSH to do so (otherwise ANDROID complains of "this file cannot be overwritten on production models of this Operating System", or something very along those lines - this way gets you around that annoyance along with you possibly having to clear some space there yourself if you packed it with things!).

18.) Bad news: ADBLOCK CAN BE DETECTED FOR: See here on that note -> []

HOSTS files are NOT THAT EASILY "webbug" BLOCKABLE by websites, as was tried on users by ARSTECHNICA (and it worked on AdBlock in that manner), to that websites' users' dismay:



An experiment gone wrong - By Ken Fisher | Last updated March 6, 2010 11:11 AM []

"Starting late Friday afternoon we conducted a 12 hour experiment to see if it would be possible to simply make content disappear for visitors who were using a very popular ad blocking tool. Technologically, it was a success in that it worked. Ad blockers, and only ad blockers, couldn't see our content."


"Our experiment is over, and we're glad we did it because it led to us learning that we needed to communicate our point of view every once in a while. Sure, some people told us we deserved to die in a fire. But that's the Internet!"

Thus, as you can see? Well - THAT all "went over like a lead balloon" with their users in other words, because Arstechnica was forced to change it back to the old way where ADBLOCK still could work to do its job (REDDIT however, has not, for example). However/Again - this is proof that HOSTS files can still do the job, blocking potentially malscripted ads (or ads in general because they slow you down) vs. adblockers like ADBLOCK!


19.) Even WIKILEAKS "favors" blacklists (because they work, and HOSTS can be a blacklist vs. known BAD sites/servers/domain-host names):



"we are in favour of 'Blacklists', be it for mail servers or websites, they have to be compiled with care... Fortunately, more responsible blacklists, like (which protects the Firefox browser)...


20.) AND, LASTLY? SINCE MALWARE GENERALLY HAS TO OPERATE ON WHAT YOU YOURSELF CAN DO (running as limited class/least privlege user, hopefully, OR even as ADMIN/ROOT/SUPERUSER)? HOSTS "LOCK IN" malware too, vs. communicating "back to mama" for orders (provided they have name servers + C&C botnet servers listed in them, blocked off in your HOSTS that is) - you might think they use a hardcoded IP, which IS possible, but generally they do not & RECYCLE domain/host names they own (such as has been seen with the RBN (Russian Business Network) lately though it was considered "dead", other malwares are using its domains/hostnames now, & this? This stops that cold, too - Bonus!)...

21.) Custom HOSTS files gain users back more "screen real estate" by blocking out banner ads... it's great on PC's for speed along with MORE of what I want to see/read (not ads), & efficiency too, but EVEN BETTER ON SMARTPHONES - by far. It matters MOST there imo @ least, in regards to extra screen real-estate.

Still - It's a GOOD idea to layer in the usage of BOTH browser addons for security like adblock ( [] ), IE 9's new TPL's ( [] ), &/or NoScript ( [] especially this one, as it covers what HOSTS files can't in javascript which is the main deliverer of MOST attacks online & SECUNIA.COM can verify this for anyone really by looking @ the past few years of attacks nowadays), for the concept of "layered security"....

It's just that HOSTS files offer you a LOT MORE gains than Adblock ( [] ) does alone (as hosts do things adblock just plain cannot & on more programs, for more speed, security, and "stealth" to a degree even), and it corrects problems in DNS (as shown above via hardcodes of your favorite sites into your HOSTS file, and more (such as avoiding DNS request logs)).

ALSO - Some more notes on DNS servers & their problems, very recent + ongoing ones:


DNS flaw reanimates slain evil sites as ghost domains: []


BIND vs. what the Chinese are doing to DNS lately? See here: []



(Yes, even "security pros" are helpless vs. DNS problems in code bugs OR redirect DNS poisoning issues, & they can only try to "set the DNS record straight" & then, they still have to wait for corrected DNS info. to propogate across all subordinate DNS servers too - lagtime in which folks DO get "abused" in mind you!)


DNS vs. the "Kaminsky DNS flaw", here (and even MORE problems in DNS than just that): []

(Seems others are saying that some NEW "Bind9 flaw" is worse than the Kaminsky flaw ALONE, up there, mind you... probably corrected (hopefully), but it shows yet again, DNS hassles (DNS redirect/DNS poisoning) being exploited!)


Moxie Marlinspike's found others (0 hack) as well...

Nope... "layered security" truly IS the "way to go" - hacker/cracker types know it, & they do NOT want the rest of us knowing it too!...

(So until DNSSEC takes "widespread adoption"? HOSTS are your answer vs. such types of attack, because the 1st thing your system refers to, by default, IS your HOSTS file (over say, DNS server usage). There are decent DNS servers though, such as OpenDNS, ScrubIT, or even NORTON DNS (more on each specifically below), & because I cannot "cache the entire internet" in a HOSTS file? I opt to use those, because I have to (& OpenDNS has been noted to "fix immediately", per the Kaminsky flaw, in fact... just as a sort of reference to how WELL they are maintained really!)


DNS Hijacks Now Being Used to Serve Black Hole Exploit Kit: []


DNS experts admit some of the underlying foundations of the DNS protocol are inherently weak: []


Potential 0-Day Vulnerability For BIND 9: []


Five DNS Threats You Should Protect Against: []


DNS provider decked by DDoS dastards: []


Ten Percent of DNS Servers Still Vulnerable: (so much for "conscientious patching", eh? Many DNS providers weren't patching when they had to!) []




TimeWarner DNS Hijacking: []


DNS Re-Binding Attacks: []


DNS Server Survey Reveals Mixed Security Picture: []


Halvar figured out super-secret DNS vulnerability: []


BIND Still Susceptible To DNS Cache Poisoning: []


DNS Poisoning Hits One of China's Biggest ISPs: []


DDoS Attacks Via DNS Recursion: []


High Severity BIND DNS Vulnerability Advisory Issued: []


Photobucketâ(TM)s DNS records hijacked: []


Protecting Browsers from DNS Rebinding Attacks: []


DNS Problem Linked To DDoS Attacks Gets Worse: []


HOWEVER - Some DNS servers are "really good stuff" vs. phishing, known bad sites/servers/hosts-domains that serve up malware-in-general & malicious scripting, botnet C&C servers, & more, such as:

Norton DNS -> []
  ScrubIT DNS -> []
  OpenDNS -> []

(Norton DNS in particular, is exclusively for blocking out malware, for those of you that are security-conscious. ScrubIT filters pr0n material too, but does the same, & OpenDNS does phishing protection. Each page lists how & why they work, & why they do so. Norton DNS can even show you its exceptions lists, plus user reviews & removal procedures requests, AND growth stats (every 1/2 hour or so) here -> [] so, that ought to "take care of the naysayers" on removal requests, &/or methods used plus updates frequency etc./et al...)

HOWEVER - There's ONLY 1 WEAKNESS TO ANY network defense, including HOSTS files (vs. host-domain name based threats) & firewalls (hardware router type OR software type, vs. IP address based threats): Human beings, & they not being 'disciplined' about the indiscriminate usage of javascript (the main "harbinger of doom" out there today online), OR, what they download for example... & there is NOTHING I can do about that! (Per Dr. Manhattan of "The Watchmen", ala -> "I can change almost anything, but I can't change human nature")

HOWEVER AGAIN - That's where NORTON DNS, OpenDNS, &/or ScrubIT DNS help!

(Especially for noob/grandma level users who are unaware of how to secure themselves in fact, per a guide like mine noted above that uses "layered-security" principles!)

ScrubIT DNS, &/or OpenDNS are others alongside Norton DNS (adding on phishing protection too) as well!

( & it's possible to use ALL THREE in your hardware NAT routers, and, in your Local Area Connection DNS properties in Windows, for again, "Layered Security" too)...




"Ever since I've installed a host file ( to redirect advertisers to my loopback, I haven't had any malware, spyware, or adware issues. I first started using the host file 5 years ago." - by TestedDoughnut (1324447) on Monday December 13, @12:18AM (#34532122)

"I use a custom /etc/hosts to block ads... my file gets parsed basically instantly ... So basically, for any modern computer, it has zero visible impact. And even if it took, say, a second to parse, that would be more than offset by the MANY seconds saved by not downloading and rendering ads. I have noticed NO ill effects from running a custom /etc/hosts file for the last several years. And as a matter of fact I DO run http servers on my computers and I've never had an /etc/hosts-related problem... it FUCKING WORKS and makes my life better overall." - by sootman (158191) on Monday July 13 2009, @11:47AM (#28677363) Homepage Journal

"I actually went and downloaded a 16k line hosts file and started using that after seeing that post, you know just for trying it out. some sites load up faster." - by gl4ss (559668) on Thursday November 17, @11:20AM (#38086752) Homepage Journal

"Better than an ad blocker, imo. Hosts file entries: [] " - by TempestRose (1187397) on Tuesday March 15, @12:53PM (#35493274)

"^^ One of the many reasons why I like the user-friendliness of the /etc/hosts file." - by lennier1 (264730) on Saturday March 05, @09:26PM (#35393448)

"They've been on my HOSTS block for years" - by ScottCooperDotNet (929575) on Thursday August 05 2010, @01:52AM (#33147212)

"I'm currently only using my hosts file to block pheedo ads from showing up in my RSS feeds and causing them to take forever to load. Regardless of its original intent, it's still a valid tool, when used judiciously." - by Bill Dog (726542) on Monday April 25, @02:16AM (#35927050) Homepage Journal

"you're right about hosts files" - by drinkypoo (153816) on Thursday May 26, @01:21PM (#36252958) Homepage

"APK's monolithic hosts file is looking pretty good at the moment." - by Culture20 (968837) on Thursday November 17, @10:08AM (#38085666)

"I also use the MVPS ad blocking hosts file." - by Rick17JJ (744063) on Wednesday January 19, @03:04PM (#34931482)

"I use ad-Block and a hostfile" - by Ol Olsoc (1175323) on Tuesday March 01, @10:11AM (#35346902)

"I do use Hosts, for a couple fake domains I use." - by icebraining (1313345) on Saturday December 11, @09:34AM (#34523012) Homepage

"It's a good write up on something everybody should use, why you were modded down is beyond me. Using a HOSTS file, ADblock is of no concern and they can do what they want." - by Trax3001BBS (2368736) on Monday December 12, @10:07PM (#38351398) Homepage Journal

"I want my surfing speed back so I block EVERY fucking ad. i.e. [] and [] FTW" - by UnknownSoldier (67820) on Tuesday December 13, @12:04PM (#38356782)

"Let me introduce you to the file: /etc/hosts" - by fahrbot-bot (874524) on Monday December 19, @05:03PM (#38427432)

"I use a hosts file" - by EdIII (1114411) on Tuesday December 13, @01:17PM (#38357816)

"I'm tempted to go for a hacked hosts file that simply resolves most advert sites to" - by bLanark (123342) on Tuesday December 13, @01:13PM (#38357760)

"this is not a troll, which hosts file source you recommend nowadays? it's a really handy method for speeding up web and it works." - by gl4ss (559668) on Thursday March 22, @08:07PM (#39446525) Homepage Journal

"A hosts file certainly does not require "a lot of work" to maintain, and it quite effectively kills a LOT of advertising and tracking schemes. . In fact, I never would have considered trying to use it for ddefending against viruses or malware." - by RocketRabbit (830691) on Thursday December 30 2010, @05:48PM (#34715060)


Then, there is also the words of respected security expert, Mr. Oliver Day, from SECURITYFOCUS.COM to "top that all off" as well:


Some "PERTINENT QUOTES/EXCERPTS" to back up my points with (for starters):


"The host file on my day-to-day laptop is now over 16,000 lines long. Accessing the Internet -- particularly browsing the Web -- is actually faster now."

Speed, and security, is the gain... others like Mr. Day note it as well!


"From what I have seen in my research, major efforts to share lists of unwanted hosts began gaining serious momentum earlier this decade. The most popular appear to have started as a means to block advertising and as a way to avoid being tracked by sites that use cookies to gather data on the user across Web properties. More recently, projects like Spybot Search and Destroy offer lists of known malicious servers to add a layer of defense against trojans and other forms of malware."

Per my points exactly, no less... & guess who was posting about HOSTS files a 14++ yrs. or more back & Mr. Day was reading & now using? Yours truly (& this is one of the later ones, from 2001 [] (but the example HOSTS file with my initials in it is FAR older, circa 1998 or so) or thereabouts, and referred to later by a pal of mine who moderates (where I posted on HOSTS for YEARS (1997 onwards)) -> [] !


"Shared host files could be beneficial for other groups as well. Human rights groups have sought after block resistant technologies for quite some time. The GoDaddy debacle with NMap creator Fyodor (corrected) showed a particularly vicious blocking mechanism using DNS registrars. Once a registrar pulls a website from its records, the world ceases to have an effective way to find it. Shared host files could provide a DNS-proof method of reaching sites, not to mention removing an additional vector of detection if anyone were trying to monitor the use of subversive sites. One of the known weaknesses of the Tor system, for example, is direct DNS requests by applications not configured to route such requests through Tor's network."

There you go: AND, it also works vs. the "KAMINSKY DNS FLAW" & DNS poisoning/redirect attacks, for redirectable weaknesses in DNS servers (non DNSSEC type, & set into recursive mode especially) and also in the TOR system as well (that lends itself to anonymous proxy usage weaknesses I noted above also) and, you'll get to sites you want to, even IF a DNS registrar drops said websites from its tables as shown here Beating Censorship By Routing Around DNS -> [] & even DNSBL also (DNS Block Lists) -> [] as well - DOUBLE-BONUS!


* POSTS ABOUT HOSTS FILES I DID on "/." THAT HAVE DONE WELL BY OTHERS & WERE RATED HIGHLY, 26++ THUSFAR (from +3 -> +1 RATINGS, usually "informative" or "interesting" etc./et al):

  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> []
  APK 20++ POINTS ON HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 (w/ facebook known bad sites blocked) -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP CAN DO SAME AS THE "CloudFlare" Server-Side service:2011 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2011 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP & OPERA HAUTE SECURE:2011 -> [] in HOSTS:2009 -> [] IN HOSTS:2009 -> [] in HOSTS:2009 -> [] in HOSTS:2009 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> [] (still says INSIGHTFUL)
  HOSTS MOD UP vs. botnet: 2012 -> []


Windows 7, VISTA, & Server 2008 have a couple of "issues" I don't like in them, & you may not either, depending on your point of view (mine's based solely on efficiency & security), & if my take on these issues aren't "good enough"? I suggest reading what ROOTKIT.COM says, link URL is in my "p.s." @ the bottom of this post:

1.) HOSTS files being unable to use "0" for a blocking IP address - this started in 12/09/2008 after an "MS Patch Tuesday" in fact for VISTA (when it had NO problem using it before that, as Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 still can)... & yes, this continues in its descendants, Windows Server 2008 &/or Windows 7 as well.

So, why is this a "problem" you might ask?

Ok - since you can technically use either:

a.) (the "loopback adapter address")
b.) (next smallest & next most efficient)
c.) The smallest & fastest plain-jane 0


You can use ANY of those, in order to block out known bad sites &/or adbanners in a HOSTS file this way??

Microsoft has "promoted bloat" in doing so... no questions asked.

Simply because

1.) = 9 bytes in size on disk & is the largest/slowest
2.) = 7 bytes & is the next largest/slowest in size on disk
3.) 0 = 1 byte

(& HOSTS files extend across EVERY webbrowser, email program, or in general every webbound program you use & thus HOSTS are "global" in coverage this way AND function on any OS that uses the BSD derived IP stack (which most all do mind you, even MS is based off of it, as BSD's IS truly, "the best in the business"), & when coupled with say, IE restricted zones, FireFox addons like NoScript &/or AdBlock, or Opera filter.ini/urlfilter.ini, for layered security in this capacity for webbrowsers & SOME email programs (here, I mean ones "built into" browsers themselves like Opera has for example))

MS has literally promoted bloat in this file, making it load slower from disk, into memory! This compounds itself, the more entries your HOSTS file contains... & for instance? Mine currently contains nearly 654,000 entries of known bad adbanners, bad websites, &/or bad nameservers (used for controlling botnets, misdirecting net requests, etc. et al).

Now, IF I were to use My "huge" HOSTS file would be approximately 27mb in size... using (next smallest) it would be 19mb in size - HOWEVER? Using 0 as my blocking IP, it is only 14mb in size. See my point?

(For loads either in the local DNS cache, or system diskcache if you run w/out the local DNS client service running, this gets slower the larger each HOSTS file entry is (which you have to stall the DNS client service in Windows for larger ones, especially if you use a "giant HOSTS file" (purely relative term, but once it goes over (iirc) 4mb in size, you have to cut the local DNS cache client service)))

NO questions asked - the physics of it backed me up in theory alone, but when I was questioned on it for PROOF thereof?

I wrote a small test program to load such a list into a "pascal record" (which is analagous to a C/C++ structure), which is EXACTLY what the DNS client/DNS API does as well, using a C/C++ structure (basically an array of sorts really, & a structure/record is a precursor part to a full-blown CLASS or OBJECT, minus the functions built in, this is for treating numerous variables as a SINGLE VARIABLE (for efficiency, which FORTRAN as a single example, lacks as a feature, @ least Fortran 77 did, but other languages do not))!

I even wrote another that just loaded my HOSTS file's entirety into a listbox, same results... slowest using, next slowest using, & fastest using 0.

And, sure: Some MORE "goes on" during DNS API loads (iirc, removal of duplicated entries (which I made sure my personal copy does not have these via a program I wrote to purge it of duplicated entries + to sort each entry alphabetically for easier mgt. via say, notepad.exe) & a conversion from decimal values to hex ones), but, nevertheless? My point here "holds true", of slower value loads, record-by-record, from a HOSTS file, when the entries become larger.

So, to "prove my point" to my naysayers?

I timed it using the Win32 API calls "GetTickCount" & then again, using the API calls of "QueryPerformanceCounter" as well, seeing the SAME results (a slowdown when reading in this file from disk, especially when using the larger or line item entries in a HOSTS file, vs. the smaller/faster/more efficient 0).

In my test, I saw a decline in speed/efficiency in my test doing so by using larger blocking addresses ( &/or, vs. the smallest/fastest in 0)... proving me correct on this note!

On this HOSTS issue, and the WFP design issue in my next post below?

I also then questioned MS' own staff, even their VP of development (S. Sinofsky) on this here -> [] & other places in their blogs, to get them to tell me WHY this seemingly intentional inefficiency was implemented... & I have YET to get a solid LOGICAL answer on this as to why it was done - THUS, @ this point?

I am convinced they (MS) do NOT have a good reason for doing this... because of their lack of response there on this note. Unless it has something to do with IPv6 (most folks use IPv4 still), I cannot understand WHY this design mistake imo, has occurred, in HOSTS files...


2.) The "Windows Filtering Platform", which is now how the firewall works in VISTA, Server 2008, & Windows 7...

Sure it works in this new single point method & it is simple to manage & "sync" all points of it, making it easier for network techs/admins to manage than the older 3 part method, but that very thing works against it as well, because it is only a single part system now!

Thus, however?

This "single layer design" in WFP, now represents a SINGLE POINT OF FAILURE/ATTACK for malware makers to 'take down'!

(Which is 1 of the 1st things a malware attempts to do, is to take down any software firewalls present, or even the "Windows Security Center" itself which should warn you of the firewall "going down", & it's fairly easy to do either by messaging the services they use, or messing up their registry init. settings)

VS. the older (up to) 3 part method used in Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003, for protecting a system via IP Filtering, the Windows native Firewall, &/or IPSEC. Each of which uses diff. drivers, & layers of the IP stack to function from, as well as registry initialization settings.

Think of the older 3 part design much the same as the reason why folks use door handle locks, deadbolt locks, & chain locks on their doors... multipart layered security.

(Each of which the latter older method used, had 3 separate drivers & registry settings to do their jobs, representing a "phalanx like"/"zone defense like" system of backup of one another (like you see in sports OR ancient wars, and trust me, it WORKS, because on either side of yourself, you have "backup", even if YOU "go down" vs. the opponent)).

I.E.-> Take 1 of the "older method's" 3 part defenses down? 2 others STILL stand in the way, & they are not that simple to take them ALL down...

(Well, @ least NOT as easily as "taking out" a single part defensive system like WFP (the new "Windows Filtering Platform", which powers the VISTA, Windows Server 2008, & yes, Windows 7 firewall defense system)).

On this "single-part/single-point of attack" WFP (vs. Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003's IP stack defense design in 3-part/zone defense/phalanx type arrangement) as well as the HOSTS issue in my post above?

I also then questioned MS' own staff, even their VP of development (S. Sinofsky) on this here -> [] & other places in their blogs, to get them to tell me WHY this seemingly intentional inefficiency was implemented... & I have YET to get a solid LOGICAL answer on this as to why it was done - THUS, @ this point?

I'll stick to my thoughts on it, until I am shown otherwise & proven wrong.


Following up on what I wrote up above, so those here reading have actual technical references from Microsoft themselves ("The horses' mouth"), in regards to the Firewall/PortFilter/IPSec designs (not HOSTS files, that I am SURE I am correct about, no questions asked) from my "Point #2" above?

Thus, I'll now note how:


1.) TCP/IP packet processing paths differences between in how Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 did it (IPSEC.SYS (IP Security Policies), IPNAT.SYS (Windows Firewall), IPFLTDRV.SYS (Port Filtering), & TCPIP.SYS (base IP driver))...

2.) AND, how VISTA/Server 2008/Windows 7 do it now currently, using a SINGLE layer (WFP)...


First off, here is HOW it worked in Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 - using 3 discrete & different drivers AND LEVELS/LAYERS of the packet processing path they worked in: []

The Cable Guy - June 2005: TCP/IP Packet Processing Paths


The following components process IP packets:

IP forwarding Determines the next-hop interface and address for packets being sent or forwarded.

TCP/IP filtering Allows you to specify by IP protocol, TCP port, or UDP port, the types of traffic that are acceptable for incoming local host traffic (packets destined for the host). You can configure TCP/IP filtering on the Options tab from the advanced properties of the Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) component in the Network Connections folder.

* "Here endeth the lesson..." and, if you REALLY want to secure your system? Please refer to this: []

APK [mailto]

P.S.=> SOME MINOR "CAVEATS/CATCH-22's" - things to be aware of for "layered security" + HOSTS file performance - easily overcome, or not a problem at all:

A.) HOSTS files don't function under PROXY SERVERS (except for Proximitron, which has a filter that allows it) - Which is *the "WHY"* of why I state in my "P.S." section below to use both AdBlock type browser addon methods (or even built-in block lists browsers have such as Opera's URLFILTER.INI file, & FireFox has such as list as does IE also in the form of TPL (tracking protection lists -> [] , good stuff )) in combination with HOSTS, for the best in "layered security" (alongside .pac files + custom cascading style sheets that can filter off various tags such as scripts or ads etc.) - but proxies, especially "HIGHLY ANONYMOUS" types, generally slow you down to a CRAWL online (& personally, I cannot see using proxies "for the good" typically - as they allow "truly anonymous posting" & have bugs (such as TOR has been shown to have & be "bypassable/traceable" via its "onion routing" methods)).

B.) HOSTS files do NOT protect you vs. javascript (this only holds true IF you don't already have a bad site blocked out in your HOSTS file though, & the list of sites where you can obtain such lists to add to your HOSTS are above (& updated daily in many of them)).

C.) HOSTS files (relatively "largish ones") require you to turn off Windows' native "DNS local client cache service" (which has a problem in that it's designed with a non-redimensionable/resizeable list, array, or queue (DNS data loads into a C/C++ structure actually/afaik, which IS a form of array)) - covers that in detail and how to easily do this in Windows (this is NOT a problem in Linux, & it's 1 thing I will give Linux over Windows, hands-down). Relatively "smallish" HOSTS files don't have this problem ( offers 2 types for this).

D.) HOSTS files, once read/loaded, once? GET CACHED! Right into the kernelmode diskcaching subsystem (fast & efficient RAM speed), for speed of access/re-access (@ system startup in older MS OS' like 2000, or, upon a users' 1st request that's "Webbound" via say, a webbrowser) gets read into either the DNS local caching client service (noted above), OR, if that's turned off? Into your local diskcache (like ANY fil

The abusive downmodder is the impostor... apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43315545)

See here, explains it all -> []

* :)

I.E./Summary: Trolls had a challenge put to them to validly disprove my points in the post I just replied to - result? Trolls FAIL... lol!


P.S.=> That's what makes me LAUGH harder than ANYTHING ELSE on this forums (full of "FUD" spreading trolls) - When you hit trolls with facts & truths they CANNOT disprove validly on computing tech based grounds, this is the result - Applying unjustifiable downmods to effetely & vainly *try* to "hide" my posts & facts/truths they extoll!

Hahaha... lol, man: Happens nearly every single time I post such lists (proving how ineffectual these trolls are), only showing how solid my posts of that nature are...

Ah yes "geek angst" @ it's 'finest' (not), vs. facts & truths = downmod by /. weak trolls!

... apk

Re:I block asteroids with my hosts file (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43315453)

Andrew Peter Kristopeit versus Jonathan Coulton... whoever wins, we lose.

Priorities (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43315289)

But why should we spend money on an asteroid capture mission when there are still banks that need fountains in their lobbies? Priorities, people!

Re:Priorities (-1, Troll)

reboot246 (623534) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315333)

Obama needs a new place to vacation. He's been damned near everywhere on Earth, some of them twice!

I haven't read about a golf course planned for the asteroid, but that's probably in the next proposal.

Re:Priorities (3, Interesting)

Concerned Onlooker (473481) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315583)

I think Obama has a ways to go to catch up to George Bush on vacation time.

Re:Priorities (1)

kwbauer (1677400) | about a year and a half ago | (#43318295)

Only when you count Bush going to the ranch that was his personal property from before he was elected, then yes. Somehow, I don't think Bush was charging the Office of the President for time spent there.

Re:Priorities (1, Insightful)

icebike (68054) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315489)

Since all the money will be spent here on earth, they can have fountains, Rolls Royces, and Yachts just by doing banker tricks with all those funds
that Boeing and General Dynamics and lowly technicians deposit from the NASA contracts.

Re:Priorities (0)

c0lo (1497653) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315683)

But why should we spend money on an asteroid capture mission when there are still banks that need fountains in their lobbies? Priorities, people!

Man, those fountains are to be built with the funds saved by scrapping the Death Star [] project - the one estimated at over $850,000,000,000,000,000.
Priorities indeed! $100 million worth of fountains in bank lobbies is simply LAME, the banks would be ashamed to display them.

asteroinauts? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43315291)

Is this a real word? asteroinauts? really?

Re:asteroinauts? (1)

thomasdz (178114) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315315)

Is this a real word? asteroinauts? really?

apparently, yes.

Re:asteroinauts? (1)

wierd_w (1375923) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315417)

Are you sure that isn't a malapropism crossed with a portmantaeu?

Dare I say it, the dreaded malamantaeu?

Re:asteroinauts? (1)

Ol Biscuitbarrel (1859702) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315521)

It's an astronaut who has ingested performance-enhancing drugs derived from seawater.

Re:asteroinauts? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43317897)

Actually the "i" was added because their ship is an iShip from iApple.

Re:asteroinauts? (1)

metaforest (685350) | about a year and a half ago | (#43320337)

Are you sure that isn't a malapropism crossed with a portmantaeu?

Dare I say it, the dreaded malamantaeu?

I was kinda thinking it is a propmanteauism.

Asterooutnauts (1)

Latent Heat (558884) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315653)

Some have an "in" and other have an "out."

Re:asteroinauts? (1)

Issarlk (1429361) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315511)

Probably as much as "Institite".

Asteroinauts are go! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43315301)


Sequester Fodder (4, Interesting)

kenh (9056) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315331)

This is a program designed to be cut, to show that this administration is being 'fiscally responsible'... I expect many such 'pie-in-the-sky' projects to be proposed, only to be cut at the altar of fiscal responsibility... And blame the minority party for the cut as well.

Hey, if they can count as savings the money they don't spend on wars that have ended, why not propose wild plans to pump up the savings?

Do you know how much (in inflation-adjusted dollars) we have saved since we stopped fighting the Second World War these last 65+ years?!?!?!

Re:Sequester Fodder (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43315421)

Do you know how much (in inflation-adjusted dollars) we have saved since we stopped fighting the Second World War these last 65+ years?!?!?!

Do YOU know how much we would have saved if the Supremes hadn't crowned your homeboy Shrub king back in 2000? Nigh-on a TRILLION and counting, and that's just for the wars of choice...

Re:Sequester Fodder (-1, Offtopic)

SplashMyBandit (1543257) | about a year and a half ago | (#43316225)

A measly Trillion dollars for removing Saddam, fighting and defeating Al Qaeda branches in Iraq and Afghanistan, kicking out the Pakistani puppet Taliban, installing some loss-hostile regimes, scaring Gaddafi into giving up his WMD, killing bin Laden himself, and *best of all* turning much of the Muslim world from cheering 9/11 into realising that jihadis are also as hazardous for their health as ours. Then there was employment for a million US servicemen for over a decade. Then there was the huge technology spin offs that keep US companies in the forefront of innovation and keep talented US citizens employed.

These days the US will spend a little less on defense but has reduced influence because of its increasingly introspective geopolitical strategy (set by the politicians, not the military). Rather than supporting allows it sells them out (eg. Poland and Romainia on missile defence), and arms jihadis hoping to curry influence (Libya, Syria), refuses to listen to please for liberty (Iran 2009), and sells out its own values (apologizing shamefully in Cairo in 2009; Hiliary Clinton disgracefully working against the 1st Amendment rights of US citizens in UN HRC Resolution 18/18).

The Trillion dollars on wars that made not only the US but the whole world safer (imagine the chaos of the world at the moment if the jihadis had not been drawn and destroyed to the honeypot in Iraq - and don't be fooled by pop analysis, Iraq created far fewer jihadis than it destroyed).

Instead, the new leftist Administration is planning to spend 60 trillion in unfunded entitlements. Please see *the numerical facts* []

So for those around the world who believe the lie that the US is bankrupting itself because of the wars it waged I would like you to examine the *figures* closely. The US military is not the source of the problem. The source of the problem are social programmes. These are large bribes made by politicians to get votes. Mostly made by the Democratic Party. The transfer of wealth from the productive sector of the US economy to the non-productive is what allows for wealth distribution and social programmes. So of this is necessary. However, the promises made far exceed the ability of those in the US who work and pay taxes (government employment is a non-contributor to this, sorry). This is what some Republicans and all Libertarians have been saying for years. Some think the conservatives are against social programmes because they are "mean, greedy old white men". No, the truth is the conservatives are numbers based (rather than primarily ideologically based like progressives/Democrats). That means the conservatives have been trying to stave off that bankruptcy. The Obama Administration has been accelerating spending far beyond what was needed for the bailout of the great recession. From a conservative point of view it looks like Obama is trying to crash the economy so that the US can be made in the image he wants (no surprise if you know who Obama's Marxist political mentors were).

So, the whole "expensive wars" and "cut the military and increase social programmes" is a diversion to keep those who are not numerically and fact focussed occupied. Please also note that while defense spending and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are massive in absolute terms, they are among the cheapest wars the US had ever fought in relative terms. This is because the US free-market economy had grown so much faster than defence spending that it made it cheap for the US to wage wars that other countries simply could not afford. You see, that is the secret to power (which China has learned). Focus less on redistribution of wealth and more on creating it for everyone (with sensible and adequate regulation and protections from exploitation, of course). As (Democratic) President Kennedy once stated in his speech, "A rising tide lifts all boats" ( To bad the supporters of Democrats have lost that lesson (as the Democrats have lots their way and become far more left-wing ideologically driven than practical) and instead focus on the politics of personality and anti-war sentiment. Focus on the numbers folks, they tell a story that is not the narrative of mainstream media anywhere!

Re:Sequester Fodder (2, Informative)

O('_')O_Bush (1162487) | about a year and a half ago | (#43316679)

Nice trolling. You had me thinking someone could actually believe that crock of conservative bullshitting until it got overwhelmingly stinky. Next time, try leaving out the part blaming the poor for our financial problems instead of massive wealth disparity and the part where you accuse the DNP of paying bribes but ignoring the bribes taken by the GOP to keep taxes minimal for economic predators and job destroyers.

As far as the 1.4 T$ wars fighting a distraction war against a minimally powerful and relatively (to real genocidal leaders in Asia and Africa) harmless dictator and the Afghan Government (at least, before they were replaced by American puppets and labeled 'insurgents' so they could be lumped with the phantom group, the few dozen member 'All Queda'). Those parts can be left in for Trolling success.

Re:Sequester Fodder (1)

SplashMyBandit (1543257) | about a year and a half ago | (#43319619)

The stink is the corruption of your thinking from a lack of economic understanding and the numbers involved in the situation. What you are advocating for the US will lead to a collapse in the same way, and for many of the same reasons, as the Soviet economy collapsed in 1991. Let us pretend that you could tax the rich as your post suggests. The result is explained very nicely by Bill Whittle in "Eat the Rich": []

The problem is not defence spending (as the grandparent suggested). It is entitlement spending. Take a look at the proportion of Government Spending as a fraction of GDP under Obama. We can understand some money used to buffer the credit crisis but the spending growth is *accelerating* ( Either he doesn't understand economics at all or he is trying to crash the system so it can be reformed (I lean toward the latter; why close the White House to tours, it saves nearly nothing compared to the four holidays the Obamas have had in the last three months; the point is to make the US people suffer in a way they notice the pain, so that the Administration will be granted a blank check/cheque of political credit to continue their ideological agenda). You can argue with me on an ideological basis but you can't argue on economics and the facts. Successive US Administrations are overspending at an unsustainable rate. This could be corrected quite easily (I believe simply raising the age for Government retirement benefits from 65 to 67 would do it overnight), but neither of the two main political parties is willing to stand up to the unreasonsable demands of voters to do it. The kind of utopian demands that you are making. However, the reality cannot be postponed indefinitely.

As far as the 1.4 T$ wars fighting a distraction war against a minimally powerful and relatively (to real genocidal leaders in Asia and Africa) harmless dictator and the Afghan Government (at least, before they were replaced by American puppets and labeled 'insurgents' so they could be lumped with the phantom group, the few dozen member 'All Queda'). Those parts can be left in for Trolling success.

Ok, now we have a worldview that is not only incorrect, it is bizarrely counter-factually conspiratorial, and then accuses me of being a troll. Dude, it is clear you have zero understanding not only of economics but also recent history, current events and global geopolitics. If all you can do is stupid demonization and fantasy theories then we can't really even begin to debate (typical of Left-wing supporters, this tactic is described here: [] ). I'm sure our fellow readers with any modicum of *factual knowledge* understand how false your statements are.

Re:Sequester Fodder (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43316781)

An effective troll leads in with a worthwhile comment ("designed to be cut") and descends into crazy land. WTF happened after "altar of fiscal responsibility"?
Anyway, the "need to cut the budget" nonsense is from both parties, largely the Republicans driving the discussion. Same old same old. Obama likes to play centrist, which practically speaking means letting Republicans wield more influence than they should. In this environment, the idea of budget-cut fodder makes a ton of sense. It might even be a mere potential target - something desired but easy to part with. I'm sure Obama would love to spend more money on research, since research of this nature is bound to have benefits beyond making us asteroid proof.

Re:Sequester Fodder (1)

kenh (9056) | about a year and a half ago | (#43317693)

Yes, it would go a long way towards making us meteor-proof.

As for the descent into crazy land:

In February, when Obama released his fiscal year 2013 budget, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget criticized the president’s plan for relying on savings from winding down the two wars. Maya MacGuineas, president of the bipartisan group, called it a “gimmick.”

“There are a number of good policies in this budget, but the use of this war gimmick is quite troubling,” said MacGuineas. “Drawing down spending on wars that were already set to wind down and that were deficit financed in the first place should not be considered savings. When you finish college, you don’t suddenly have thousands of dollars a year to spend elsewhere — in fact, you have to find a way to pay back your loans.”

Source: - under the heading $4 Trillion Seficit Reduction? []

Re:Sequester Fodder (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43318425)

Bullshit. Committee for a Responsible Budget [] is just another budget concern troll that wants to cut social services. Plenty of conservative democrats ally themselves with republicans on the issue. More importantly, the start of your descent into crazy is "blame the minority party" - as if the republicans are powerless and blameless, when the opposite is true. Not that I'm excusing the democrats, just pointing out the republicans role as thought leaders and successful policy bullies (all the more remarkable given their minority status).

Re:Sequester Fodder (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43320927)

There will be change left for this sort of bs over once Obama cuts Social Security.

no purpose (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315339)

catching a 7 meter 500 ton space rock has nothing whatever to do with diverting dangerous asteroids or killer asteroids or even the mostly annoying asteroid that broke Russian windows. Real asteroid diversion would use tutally different tactics over many months or years, provided early enough warning was had.

Re:no purpose (2, Insightful)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315441)

The purpose is to get more votes. How much of a mission do you think they're going to get from $100 million anyway? Or even $2.6billion, which makes the assumption that NASA will actually get that money.

Re:no purpose (1)

icebike (68054) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315567)

catching a 7 meter 500 ton space rock has nothing whatever to do with diverting dangerous asteroids or killer asteroids or even the mostly annoying asteroid that broke Russian windows. Real asteroid diversion would use tutally different tactics over many months or years, provided early enough warning was had.

Maybe, maybe not. The Bag-it-on-the-fly technique has been proposed for larger bodies as well. And we have enough space junk floating around the planet to practice on. You always start small. Its a practice mission at best, with a payload of manageable size.

The rock that broke up over Russia was estimated at close to 10,000 tons. NASA currently believes the Russian meteorite was about 49 feet in diameter, or 15 meters. We never saw it coming.

Re:no purpose (1)

symbolset (646467) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315605)

150 tons of that rock is rocket fuel. That is a handy thing to have at L2 if you want to intercept another earthbound rock. L2 is the ideal fuel depot for this. 150 tons is not enough, but it is a significant start.

Re:no purpose (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43315821)

Why do big dumb faggot homos subscribe to fagdot?

Not L2 (2)

Immerman (2627577) | about a year and a half ago | (#43316815)

It's a handy thing to practice catching, and a handy thing to have in orbit to practice refining fuel, but L2 is not the place to do it. L1 and L2 are extremely unstable, you have to continuously consume fuel to remain there, though you can reduce the amount by orbiting them. L3 is better, but on the opposite side of the primary. L4 and L5 are where you can actually store stuff stably - that's where asteroid fields tend to naturally accumulate.

Where L2 is useful is to hide something from the primary - for example space telescopes orbiting the Earth-Sun L2 remain constantly shielded from the sun by the Earth's shadow. Or in space-elevator scenarios, where for example a cable extending from he Moon through the Earth-Moon L1 or L2 points will hang stably in tension.

Re:Not L2 (1)

symbolset (646467) | about a year and a half ago | (#43317167)

Stationkeeping is pretty easy when the asteroid you're mining is 30% water, like chondrites are. Water makes LH2/LO2 with sufficient electrical inputs.

Re:Not L2 (1)

Immerman (2627577) | about a year and a half ago | (#43319247)

Where are you getting that 30% number from? Chrondites are believed to have formed in the outer solar system where the minerals were shaped by water, but I know of no direct evidence that inner-system chrondites still contain it in appreciable quantities. Ice is unstable within the solar frost line, which lies partway through the asteroid belt beyond Mars. It will tend to have sublimated off any near-Earth asteroids.

Assuming it does contain water one of the the major purposes of such a mission would be to discover if we actually can convert that to fuel, it might not be a simple process, for example there may be considerably more volatile compounds present that have explosive implications for a naive approach. And there's still the question of why put it at an L-point at all if you're not actually using its special properties? There's an infinite number of orbits around either the Earth or the Moon, and the L1-L3 points are among the least stable. So why not just put it in a stable orbit instead? It's not like putting it behind the moon will protect us, as soon as the orbit destabilizes if will drift out of alignment and we'll be no better off than if it were in any other orbit beyond the moon, and potentially much worse off since the exit paths from an L-point can be quite chaotic (hence their importance to the ITN). For maximum safety better to put it in a lunar orbit so any accidents will send it crashing into the moon.

Re:Not L2 (1)

DanielRavenNest (107550) | about a year and a half ago | (#43320753)

You appear to have missed "hydrates" - minerals with chemically bound water. See table 5 (p44) at [] Many of the minerals listed contain bound water, or OH components which can be driven off by heating.

Re:no purpose (4, Informative)

tragedy (27079) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315847)

mostly annoying asteroid that broke Russian windows.

Right, the mostly annoying half megaton explosion that injured over a thousand people and hospitalized over a hundred, and caused tens of millions of dollars of property damage. Most of the damage was broken glass, but it did manage to collapse the roof of one factory. If it had managed to last another half a second or so before exploding, it probably would have killed a hundred thousand or more people. I guess, in the grand scheme of things, that might only count as mostly annoying, but not to the people who live there.

Re:no purpose (1, Flamebait)

Immerman (2627577) | about a year and a half ago | (#43316847)

Right. No big deal as medium-small asteroid impacts go. Had it instead come in at a steep angle and hit a city it would have done some damage.

Think of it this way - if we had seen it in time, and had the proven tech to divert it, would it have been worth the effort to divert? Probably not, much cheaper to replace some windows. Even a direct impact would only be mildly annoying unless it hit near something sensitive, might even through up enough dust to do a little local cooling and cloud seeding. Even if a lot of people died, people die all the time, on average about 1.8 every second of every day, and they get replaced almost three times as fast. If it costs a few billion dollars to keep that number from doubling for an hour or two, does it really make sense to do so? Obviously it can be a useful excuse if there are other motives in play, such as when the US started spending trillions of dollars to "retaliate" against a government unrelated to a handful of extremists who caused a half-hour or so worth of extra deaths, or if we were actually developing and testing the asteroid-capturing tech that will to let us expand off the planet. But when it comes down to using proven technology to divert a threat, it's going to come down to dollars and cents - the only way minor asteroids like this will get diverted is if we spot them many years ahead of time and can send out a small, cheap interceptor to deflect it, or if it's valuable and a good orbital capture candidate.

Re:no purpose (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year and a half ago | (#43318891)

get real, 17 meter asteroid hit the ground once every century. usually in places where there is no one. even north russia is mostly full of places where there is no one had such a thing "come in at steep angle". you'd likly have a pretty hole in the ground for tourists, that's all.

Re:no purpose (1)

khallow (566160) | about a year and a half ago | (#43318905)

sually in places where there is no one


you'd likly have a pretty hole in the ground for tourists

Not everywhere has no one. If that pretty hole ends up in Paris or Mexico City, then you have a lot of dead people in addition to the pretty hole.

Re:no purpose (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about a year and a half ago | (#43316457)

Why does northern Russia keep having problems with asteroids and comets? Do they jack off too much or something?

Re:no purpose (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year and a half ago | (#43318867)

no, there are no more incidents there than anywhere else. that particular type of event occurs about once a century somewhere on this planet

Re:no purpose (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about a year and a half ago | (#43320099)


Re:no purpose (1)

Teun (17872) | about a year and a half ago | (#43319251)

A fairly simple reason, think about the chance such a meteor would strike say Luxembourg or Andorra vs. the chance it hits Texas.

Siberia is a big target.

Re:no purpose (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about a year and a half ago | (#43316967)

catching a 7 meter 500 ton space rock has nothing whatever to do with diverting dangerous asteroids or killer asteroids

You claim that the only possibilities are purposelessness or diverting asteroids from striking the planet, but this is patently false. Notably, we would also like to mine asteroids.

Re:no purpose (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year and a half ago | (#43318841)

mining would be done on huge asteroids without moving them at all, and only the products moved where needed. we would not play with little rocks

Re:no purpose (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about a year and a half ago | (#43318871)

mining would be done on huge asteroids without moving them at all,

Begging the question, is this true? There are several countermodels.

and only the products moved where needed. we would not play with little rocks

Begging the question again.

I think it's not at all unlikely that we'll play with small rocks and just throw them wholesale into a solar smelter. When you have basically unlimited energy to work with, and virtually no worries about pollution (at least, waste disposal is easy) the whole game changes.

Re:no purpose (1)

lxs (131946) | about a year and a half ago | (#43318503)

Are you implying that in Putin's Russia asteroid catches YOU?

"Mom, look what followed me home . . . !" (4, Funny)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315431)

". . . can I keep it . . . ?"

Re:"Mom, look what followed me home . . . !" (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about a year and a half ago | (#43316449)

can I keep it?

No, son, it's infested [] .

What is... (2, Funny)

wbr1 (2538558) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315451)

An asteroinaut?

Re:What is... (1)

skine (1524819) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315937)

It seems to be a poor attempt at a joke.

New TPB server location (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43315525)

I foresee that 2-3 days from now, depending on your time zone, the Pirate Bay will announce a joint project with NASA to host the first tracker in outer space.

Let Me Get This Straight Dept. (0)

Un pobre guey (593801) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315547)

So we will spend a reasonable amount of money to send a robot out someplace to fetch an asteroid and put it into lunar orbit so that some bozos can go check it out in person at much greater expense? Why not have the robot do everything for a lot less money? Could it be (just speculating here) that the $100M project is a distraction from the manned project that will, as usual, channel huge amounts of money for yet another pointless human presence?

Aerospace pork will never end. Their lobbying is just too strong, and hordes of fanboys still believe a human has to be out there or it isn't exciting enough.

Re:Let Me Get This Straight Dept. (4, Interesting)

HornWumpus (783565) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315593)

L4/L5 is valuable real estate. First nation to park a base there owns it.

We should send two.

Re:Let Me Get This Straight Dept. (2)

symbolset (646467) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315713)

L2 is even more precious as it is the only fairly stable spot in the Earth-moon system where if you're not careful you fall into interplanetary space. Every other place but this requires significant delta-v to escape the Earth's or the moon's gravity. Here though, just drift a little too far from the moon and away you go.

Re:Let Me Get This Straight Dept. (4, Informative)

khallow (566160) | about a year and a half ago | (#43316319)

L2 is even more precious as it is the only fairly stable spot in the Earth-moon system where if you're not careful you fall into interplanetary space.

L1 through L3 are not stable points. L4 and L5 have weird dynamics, but things put there will stay there with extremely low delta v.

And you can "fall" into interplanetary space very easily (that is, with arbitrarily low, but well timed delta-v) from any of the Lagrange points. L2 is not unique in this respect.

Re:Let Me Get This Straight Dept. (1)

symbolset (646467) | about a year and a half ago | (#43316493)

Well yeah, L4 and L5 are more stable. L2 requires station keeping - but not much. I don't think L1 or L3 would be very useful. You got me on the falling out piece - I had forgot. I should think habitations at L4 and L5 where they won't fall out, refining and fuel depot at L2. Anyway, as long as we're talking about exploring the solar system on a low energy budget, I suppose folks will want to read about the Interplanetary Transport Network [] .

Re:Let Me Get This Straight Dept. (1)

khallow (566160) | about a year and a half ago | (#43316645)

I don't think L1 or L3 would be very useful.

L1 is between Earth and the Moon. That makes it quite useful for anything going on between the two, like communications networks. It also makes a great anchor point for a space tether (something which could be made with current materials!) from the Moon.

L3 is just like L2 though a touch closer to Earth. You can park spacecraft out there with modest station keeping issues. The L2 advantage is that it's line of sight with the far side of the Moon so you can either park spacecraft that hide from Earth (when very close to the L2 point) or which can communicate with both Earth and the far side of the Moon (a halo orbit further away from L2). But if you're just looking for some place to put something, L3 will work.

Re:Let Me Get This Straight Dept. (2)

Immerman (2627577) | about a year and a half ago | (#43316931)

I think you mostly nailed it - L1 is great as a pass-through point for a lunar elevator, which could potentially extend all the way down to geostationary orbit, obviating the need to each orbital velocities for an Earth-Moon transit. Probably *the* prime piece of orbital "real estate". Not really anything special otherwise, after all the Earth and Moon already have line of site with each other.

An L2 halo orbit would be handy for communication with the far side of the moon, though a simple collection of 3+ satellites in lunar orbit would do much the same for a far larger area with less transmission lag time, and any lunar communication satellites would destroy the radio "quiet spot" potential of using it for telescopy completely shielded from basically all earthbound and orbital signal sources. Could also send another tether through the point itself, but I don't see that that is really all that useful - a low orbiting tumbling cable space elevator would be far cheaper and more effective for launching stuff from the moon's surface out of Earth space.

L4 and L5 are handy gathering points since stuff will tend clump together and they make a pair of nice big targets for incoming asteroid captures and the like.

L3 is... just a place that's there. Can't really think of any special use for it beyond being a focal point on the Interplanetary Transport Network along with the other L-points. After all, if you're just putting something in orbit any orbit will do, and unlike L3 most of them don't require any appreciable station-keeping.

Re:Let Me Get This Straight Dept. (1)

DanielRavenNest (107550) | about a year and a half ago | (#43321039)

> L1 is great as a pass-through point for a lunar elevator,

Rotovator/Skyhook type rotating elevators are demonstrably better in mass ratio, transit time, and meteor exposure than a stationary elevator.

Assume you want to take off and land from the Moon, and your rotating elevator is designed for a comfortable 1 gravity at the tips. Lunar orbit velocity @ 280 km altitude is 1560 m/s. To have an equal rotation tip velocity @ 1 g you need a 248 km radius. Thus the tip becomes motionless over the Lunar surface at about 30 km altitude (we want some clearance to avoid mountains and for orbit shifts). The rotation period is 1000 seconds. If you wait half a rotation and let go, you are moving at twice orbit velocity, because the velocity of tip + orbit motion of the center of the structure now add instead of cancel. This is more than enough to escape the Moon. By climbing some part of the 248 km radius and timing when you let go, you can inject to a wide range of orbits. Compare this to climbing a 60,000 km stationary elevator to Earth-Moon L1. It takes longer, and is more limited in destinations. Not to mention 120 times less exposure to damage from meteoroids.

As far as materials required, the acceleration varies linearly from center to tip, so it is equivalent to 124 km stress at 1 gravity. Carbon fiber has a scale length of 360 km ( [] ). Allowing a 2.8 reduction of the breaking strength for factor of safety and structural overhead, we get 128 km design scale. Rotating structures need to taper by a factor of e per design scale, so this Rotovator would taper by a factor of 2.8 from center to tip. This is quite reasonable as a design.

Re:Let Me Get This Straight Dept. (1)

symbolset (646467) | about a year and a half ago | (#43317145)

Earth-moon L3 is on the opposite side of the earth from the moon, as you know. It's a nice spot for a telescope to look for NEAs. As you pointed out it's not stable. Therefore it's not a good spot for a space station with human inhabitants. Yes, it would be a good spot for a LH2/LO2 distillery with good 0-energy transits to L2, as that sort of operation could manage their stationkeeping by changing the orientation of their thermal outputs. But refining is a messy business that messes up telescopes, so it's best if we reserved that one for astronomy. L2's angular momentum makes it a better fuel depot and jumping off spot for people in a hurry, like humans vulnerable to cosmic radiation. I think L3 is the "least best" of all the Earth-moon Lagrange points. It's where you park the least important stuff. Computing a vector from L3 to interplanetary missions seems more iffy to me than L2, which is relatively straightforward. Almost all of the paths from L3 to interplanetary space lead through L2 anyway.

Earth-moon L2 is permanently eclipsed from Earth by the moon. We can't see it from here. That's a downside. As a relay for the far side of the moon you're right: it works - as long as we have relays in orbit around the moon to relay to it. Just one would do, in a polar orbit around the moon on a plane perpendicular to the earth-moon angle, or close to it. That lunar satellite though would then have almost all the coverage L2 would directly except for the smallest "polar" patch pointed at L2 hidden by terrain. On the upside there is no more angular momentum advantaged path to interplanetary space than Earth-moon L2. Not even sun-Earth L2.

Getting to Earth-moon L3 and then killing your inertia seems costly in Delta-V to me relative to L2. Of course having their proximate gravity well L4 and L5 don't have this as much of a problem. Care to weigh in on that? You seem to know more about this than I do.

Of course all of the Lagrange points are part of an interplanetary highway that after 4 billion years have some traffic flowing. For capturing asteroids with robots this is good. For human habitation it may be bad.

Re:Let Me Get This Straight Dept. (1)

khallow (566160) | about a year and a half ago | (#43317781)

Earth-moon L2 is permanently eclipsed from Earth by the moon. We can't see it from here.

But a spacecraft can orbit the Earth-Moon L2 (via a halo orbit) far enough away and have line of sight with Earth.

Re:Let Me Get This Straight Dept. (3, Insightful)

rusty0101 (565565) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315689)

Human's have to get out there. Not as entertainment, but because if humans remain exclusively on this rock and in near earth orbits, humans are a sitting duck. The lessons learned in getting humans into low earth orbit, then high earth orbit, then to establish permanent bases on the Moon and Mars, are going to be used to develop longer term programs for human interstellar travel, exploration and in time colonization.

Or we can just develop robots to go out and do that for us and roll over here on earth and give up.

Re:Let Me Get This Straight Dept. (2)

symbolset (646467) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315743)

I don't mind if we send out robots first to make it safe and comfy for the humans who follow. As long as we get moving.

Re:Let Me Get This Straight Dept. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43316765)

And another paranoid space rant gets "insightful". I guess you can't go wrong if you believe the same religion, eh?

Re:Let Me Get This Straight Dept. (1)

Teun (17872) | about a year and a half ago | (#43319273)

Even when there's pork and fanboys involved, mankind will advance by being challenged and a challenge is much more rewarding the harder it is to achieve.

Expensive crew (1)

Grayhand (2610049) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315645)

Bruce Willis and Ben Affleck don't come cheap.

Astronauts to a 7 meter space rock? (2)

mpthompson (457482) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315663)

Seriously, wouldn't sending a handful of robotic spacecraft to characterize larger asteroids be much more worthwhile? While it could be argued that astronauts on the surface of Mars with good geologic training and tools could be more productive than a robot, I'm not sure what value sending astronauts to such a small asteroid in lunar orbit really adds.

The asteroids that really threaten Earth are an order or two of magnitude bigger -- a hundred meters to a few kilometers in size. A 7 meter asteroid may give us some insight into their composition, but it would be better to actually go an analyze the actual type of asteroids we are worried about. Knowing details of their structure and how they are held together could immediately eliminate some solutions for diverting their course if the need ever arises and provide insight that could spark creative solutions that haven't yet been thought of. This kind of work could actually be done much cheaper with robots than astronauts if what we really care about are actual results.

Re:Astronauts to a 7 meter space rock? (1)

Immerman (2627577) | about a year and a half ago | (#43317029)

Probably not - all the science that's been done by all the Mars rovers combined since the first one touched down years ago could have been done by one person with a pack full of tools in a few days - for the next few decades at least humans will be far more versatile than any robot. The only problems are that keeping people alive for extended periods in the radiation outside of Earth's magnetosphere is a major challenge, and even if you get them to Mars safely you then need to deal with either the potentially devastating PR fallout of sending someone on a one-way trip, or the phenomenal cost of a return trip or Mars colony. And knowing more about Mars beforehand is very valuable for making sure the more cost effective colony approach is as cheap and safe as possible, so sending robot scouts first makes sense. And you may not have noticed but the trend has been for each rover to have a considerably more sophisticated landing mechanism than it's predecessors - the last one with its combination of heat shield, parachute, and rockets will likely be quite similar to what the first human landing employs, and you can't meaningfully test that stuff here on Earth where the air is 20x or more as thick and winds are far slower.

Similarly capturing a tiny asteroid on the other hand acts as a proof-of-concept mission for both future asteroid diversions and the capturing of lucrative asteroids for mining, and once captured near Earth we can send humans to do the science relatively cheaply and safely - the cost to get someone from to high orbit is only a bit more than to low orbit, we just don't normally bother because for most purposes an orbit is an orbit, and the lower the better for magnetosphere-based radiation shielding.

As for the size - from what we can tell an asteroid is an asteroid - there's a few different broad classes, but aside from a handful of dwarf planets they don't appear to have any fundamental differences within a class, so we won't learn any more from a close study of a large asteroid than of a small one, and capturing a smaller one requires far less fuel, far less "overdesign" to compensate for unknowns, and involves far less risk if something goes horribly wrong and it ends up colliding with Earth. Certainly locating large asteroids is an important goal for both safety and mining purposes, but until we have a better idea of what we can and can't do to divert them it won't actually help much unless we happen to discover something major on a near-term collision course that serves to inspire more drastic funding.

Re:Astronauts to a 7 meter space rock? (1)

TheTurtlesMoves (1442727) | about a year and a half ago | (#43317399)

Probably not - all the science that's been done by all the Mars rovers combined since the first one touched down years ago could have been done by one person with a pack full of tools in a few days

Bullshit. First of all for the mass budget that a single human on mars surface needs we could send dozens of mars rovers. Not just one. Secondly you still need to send the rover. A small set of tools does not include the quite fancy lab in remote car ever sent! Fact is we don't need people there to do science. Really what can that person do that a rover can't? Walk faster? Well that was about mass budget, which you total blow with a soft flesh bag that needs air food and water.

Pound for pound, dollar for dollar. The right *tool* for this job is robots/drones/machines. It was even this way for apollo. It was stated quite clearly that manned mission to the moon would provide far less science than probes etc. But it was felt that it was the mission they could beat the russians at.

We are a tool using species. Why do so many insist on the wrong tool. Hell even if all you want is tourism, then still this is a stupid idea. This will get such a reason no closer to reality than the apollo program did.

Re:Astronauts to a 7 meter space rock? (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year and a half ago | (#43317165)

You are missing the point. It's like arguing that there was no point sending Apollo 8 around the moon when a robot mission could have done it and humans should have give directly to thesurface.

This will develop asteroid capture technology and prove the spacecraft needed to get to the moon and beyond.

Re:Astronauts to a 7 meter space rock? (1)

TheTurtlesMoves (1442727) | about a year and a half ago | (#43317419)

There really was no point. Really. It was a cold war pissing contest. Yay we can piss further than those evil commies!

Proof however is in the pudding. Can you buy a ticket to the moon? Thing is this sort of mission, and apollo are the worst way to achieve what most space enthusiast dream of. In fact its a road block to it. All that it will achieve is a massive budget for select few to do very little science.

It fails to give general access to space. It fails to deliver science for the price. It could achieve some serious drama if they die. Thats about it.

Re:Astronauts to a 7 meter space rock? (1)

DanielRavenNest (107550) | about a year and a half ago | (#43321085)

> Seriously, wouldn't sending a handful of robotic spacecraft to characterize larger asteroids be much more worthwhile?

If you design the asteroid tug right, after it returns with the first one, you can refuel it and sent it out to get another. If you use plasma (VASIMR) type thrusters, you can use oxygen as propellant. You need 2-3% of the asteroid mass as fuel, and asteroids are typically 40% Oxygen. Therefore once you get an extraction plant working, the mining is self-sustaining on fuel. You just need to replace solar arrays and thrusters when they wear out.

At 500 tons every couple of years round trip, a self-fueling tug can jumpstart serious space construction.

one solution to over population (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43315691)

plan to capture an asteroid, have something go wrong and find it breaking up an hitting several large population centres.

Re:one solution to over population (1)

khelms (772692) | about a year and a half ago | (#43318077)

And if, oops, it just happens to land on the Iranian's buried nuclear facilities, well darn.

We need to Capture a LARGE Asteroid with Value (1)

wanfuse123 (2860713) | about a year and a half ago | (#43315983)

We should be looking at getting the technology to capture LARGE asteroids instead of planning a mission to mars. If we use government funds to push private industries into getting a large rock with value into moons orbit it can provide us with a source of material to help us colonies space which is a much better goal than trying to visit mars with humans. We can continue use robots to explore mars while we work on mining space rocks for rare earths for earth and also for space and for a moon base. Perhaps it would be even better to capture a comet since the most valuable space element is water. []

Re:We need to Capture a LARGE Asteroid with Value (1)

Immerman (2627577) | about a year and a half ago | (#43317099)

Start small. We know almost nothing about asteroid composition, it's all theory and spectral analysis at this point. We catch something small, see if our theory holds water, and then make a try for something bigger and more profitable once e know we can pull off a capture rather than orbital bombardment. Comets provide a much larger challenge because they're moving much faster and are far more volatile, and even if we capture one we still have to figure out how to keep it from boiling away - the solar system's frostline is in the asteroid belt beyond Mars. Any closer to the sun and water ice isn't stable in vacuum.

Meanwhile were seeing diminishing returns on Mars exploration - between the rovers and orbital mappers we've got a pretty good idea of what to expect: plenty of air that needs only a pressurized greenhouse to make it breathable, lots of water in easily accessible polar deposits, and possibly far more widespread in the soil, and plenty of sand for construction materials. Enough in short to know that Mars is likely by far the most hospitable place in the solar system beyond Earth, and that more studies are unlikely to reveal drastically better colony sites or resources than we've already found, and sending yet another humvee-size mobile research station is transportation capacity that could instead be allocated to colony supplies, beyond perhaps one or two more designed specifically to research colony-relevant information (inspecting the best-choice colony site, testing potential binding agents for mars-crete, etc) Once we have people on site then the science can really take off - one researcher with the equivalent of a high school science lab could accomplish as much in a week as all our rovers to date combined . In a year a colony could be well on it's way to self-sufficiency, and weekend science projects would have transformed our understanding of the planet. Robots are great for repetitive tasks, but they're pretty lousy for dealing with the unexpected. Humans totally outstrip them in versatility, and that seems unlikely to change for at least a several decades. Even a fully humanoid robot couldn't hope to compete with someone on site - cobbling together a new scientific instrument from supplies on hand with a 8-40 minute communication delay would transform a quick half-hour project to a weeks-long exercise in frustration, if you were lucky. And we're nowhere near developing an AI capable of doing such a thing on it's own, even if only semi-autonomously. A suitably meticulous and adventurous human, even one with minimal scientific background but guided by experts on Earth would be far, far more effective.

Meanwhile we'd also be getting extensive experience in colonizing a hostile environment with minimal resources, experience that would be valuable for establishing bases in far more hostile environments on asteroids or the Moon.

Great idea should you get it right. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43315995)

This is an awesome idea should they get it right.

And if they get it wrong, screw up the asteroid's course and then set it directly on a path for the earth?

Only $100 million? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43316019)

That sounds like 10-100x too small a number. I'd be shocked if they successfully did that for $100 million.

Considering the bailouts (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43316127)

If they find one of those solid gold asteroids they'd have an ROI of 1000%

Just like a liberal (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43316215)

capture and bring an asteroid to a high orbit...achieved new impetus due to the meteor incident over Russia and new fears of killer asteroids

Well of course the liberal impulse would be to imprison a killer asteroid instead of just executing it. I'm sure they are already developing a plan to redeem the astroid while in captivity so it can be a productive member of the celestial bodies upon release. Never mind that it's going to get anal probed every night by our tight-knit community of space trash while held in orbit and eventually just figure out how to use gravity to fall on some defenseless person.

Money for large asteroid diversion? (1)

ndogg (158021) | about a year and a half ago | (#43316403)

I really wish that we would test out some technologies for diverting large asteroids so that we're not trying to scramble at the last minute when we realize something large is coming our way. I'd like to know for certain that we'll be ready for when we see something coming our way that could cause us some serious pain or even extinction.

Ludicrous (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43316479)

Smells like yet another 'Sweetheart Deal' by WH and DoE and a 'significant other.'

Ethics violations, Fraud, and money laundering through WH (Kenya), DoE (Los Angeles) and NASA (Huston and Grand Cayman Islands Offshore Banks) bank accounts.

Wow. Looks like Obama is taking a page from Bernie Madoff's Ponzi scheme playbook and desperately trying to 'Tiger Woods' it.

This would look awesome (1)

ModernGeek (601932) | about a year and a half ago | (#43316711)

Imagine seeing an astronaut by an asteroid, with the Earth and Moon in the background.

Olympus Is Butt Fucked (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43316775)

This NASA 'proposal't is worse than possible, worse than possible, truly BUTT FUCKED, and they did the nasty to themselves.

In the 2030s historians will compare notes on the destruction of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration of the U.S.A. Department of Commerce.

Their reevaluations will be disturbing and shocking.

How many BLACKS will participate in this? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43317801)

And I don't mean cleaners, etc.

How many BLACKS (and not 90% WHITE 'blacks', like the laughable 'head of NASA' obviously is) will participate in this mission?

Oh wait! Knee jerk reaction coming from the brainwashed sheep. "Racist!"

There, saved you the trouble, you idiots.

Your country is being destroyed by millions of parasitic third world invaders who DON'T WANT TO LIVE WITH THEIR OWN RACE, and you cretins defend your own destruction.

Why does Obama want a space rock? (1)

gelfling (6534) | about a year and a half ago | (#43318015)

Nothing there to tax.

Remember it's a REUSABLE SPACE TUG (1)

wisebabo (638845) | about a year and a half ago | (#43318039)

Ok, so once the asteroid collector has delivered the asteroid to high lunar orbit, what does the spacecraft do then?

Well, if its got even a tiny fraction of its propellant left over (remember it just towed something maybe 100x its size clear across the inner solar system) , it slowly spirals down to low earth orbit and... REFUELS.

Now here's where things get interesting. Once it's refueled (remember its main consumable is up to 12,000 lbs. of Xenon, it gets its energy from solar power), it can do any number of things. Of course it could be sent out again to get another asteroid (including, as I mentioned in a previous post, one with precious WATER) but that might be boring. How about having it PAY FOR ITSELF by moving satellites from LEO to geosynchronous orbit. (This is very expensive as it typically requires an additional booster, I think the cost per pound is at least double that to low orbit). I think this market is on the order of $5B per year.

The reason why this would work is because the asteroid tug would clearly be capable of moving very(!) large payloads. It wouldn't even have to be very slow, if it can accelerate a 500 ton asteroid at 1/10,000th of a g, it could accelerate a 5 ton satellite at say 1/200th of a gee (taking into account the tug's own weight). So it could deliver the satellites in weeks if not days. Of course there would need to be a few minor design modifications to the tug. The collapsible "bag" would have to be removable and some sort of industry standard docking ports added. There would need to be some provision for refueling ports and critical components (gyroscopes, reaction wheels, electronics) would need to be replaceable/upgradeable like the Hubble space telescope. Of course servicing this "space tug" in this way is probably beyond the near term capabilities of robotics. However, rather than this being a problem, it could be an opportunity -

- for the International Space Station to actually be USEFUL. Here it could serve as a fuel depot, servicing "garage" and interchange point for these "space tugs". The kind of problem that robotics can't handle yet are ideally suited for an astronaut with a wrench (and maybe some elbow grease). The fact that the main propellant for these tugs is Xenon, an inert noble element, makes handling the fuel much less problematic (no problems with corrosion or toxicity) and safer (no fear of explosive combustion). Even the fact that these tugs use ion thrusters would be an advantage meaning that everything would be happening very slowly, if one went out of control they could probably move the entire station out of the way (like they do when avoiding space junk). The station could also keep spare, interchangeable parts for these tugs such as additional "bags" or robot arms or other modules. In short, the ISS would have a PURPOSE.

With even a little thought, these space tugs have lots of additional uses. The same high power ion engines that can move a 500 ton asteroid could also send 500 tons of cargo cheaply (if slowly) to Mars. The same collapsible bag that can capture a tumbling asteroid can easily capture a much lighter piece of space junk. All it takes is for a government with foresight to make the initial investment that may (as I've suggested) quickly repay itself perhaps many times over. And isn't that the purpose of government (if not NASA)?

(By the way, putting the mini-asteroid in high lunar orbit may be useful as a last resort because, if we detect a threatening object heading our way, it might be in a good position that we could put the mini-asteroid on a new trajectory to hit the object and thus deflect it out of the way. With luck the 500 ton mass will strike the incoming object at a high incidental angle and at a significant velocity since it'll be coming from a completely different orbit. Of course it would be much preferred to nudge the incoming object years before in deep space off of an intercept trajectory but if we're caught with our pants down it would be nice to have a big rock whirling in the sling of its lunar orbit. In that case, we coud call it "David's Rock" or "The Goliath Killer".)

Re:Remember it's a REUSABLE SPACE TUG (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43318895)

Sorry, but the ISS is practically useless for on-orbit servicing because it has no "drydock" to work in a pressurized environment. EVA repair work is incredibly slow, expensive, and yes, risky. Unless/until we perfect elastic-pressure suits instead of human-shaped balloons, it's just ridiculously difficult to get anything done. A pressurizable service bay will pay for itself quickly -- even if chemical reactivity constraints on satellites & vehicles designed for vacuum requires an inert atmosphere and therefore a helmet for O2, the ability to use ordinary tools with effectively bare hands will make service & repairs (both for the tugs, and for satellites the tugs bring in) economically feasible.

Its a test for Climate Change Geo-engineering (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43318239)

It's all about capturing a big asteroid and smashing it to dust.

The first one is a test.

Myoshi Effect (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43318293)

This reminds me of a novel I just read, THE MYOSHI EFFECT. Fiction, meet fact.

this new is a bomb! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43318505)

i fear that some air force generals as readed Footfall by larry niven and jerry pournelle.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?