Beta
×

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

Thank you!

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

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

Group Wants To Recover 36-Year-Old Historic Spacecraft From Deep Space

samzenpus posted about 4 months ago | from the bring-it-home dept.

NASA 141

An anonymous reader writes "A band of space hackers and engineers are trying to do something never done before — recover a 36 year old NASA spacecraft from the grips of deep space and time. With old NASA documents and Rockethub crowdfunding, a team led by Dennis Wingo and Keith Cowing is attempting to steer ISEE-3, later rechristened ICE, the International Cometary Explorer, back into an Earth orbit and return it to scientific operations. Dennis says, 'ISEE-3 can become a great teaching tool for future engineers and scientists helping with design and travel to Mars'. Only 40 days remain before the spacecraft will be out of range for recovery. A radio telescope is available, propulsion designs are in hand and the team is hoping for public support to provide the small amount needed to accomplish a very unique milestone in space exploration."

cancel ×

141 comments

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

So... (0)

CheezburgerBrown . (3417019) | about 4 months ago | (#46837999)

How much Money do they want?

Re:So... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838011)

Says a fucking THREE MILLION /. UID troll...

Re:So... (0, Offtopic)

CheezburgerBrown . (3417019) | about 4 months ago | (#46838025)

If you aren't about to post with a 4 digit or less UID, then suck a fat one.

Re:So... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838101)

If you aren't about to post with a 4 digit or less UID, then suck a fat one.

How about instead I tie you to a tree and let the insects eat you alive, and take time-lapse
video of the process. It will be your one chance in life at doing something worthwhile.

And we will have lava beans for dessert.

Re:So... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46839079)

Bad idea it takes a super UID to tie someone to a tree.

Re:So... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838207)

I could care less about your UID but that G+ icon by your name singles you out as a moron pretty effectively nonetheless.

Gramar Sholar (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838321)

Its 'COULDN'T' care less not COULD - darn!!! If you Could care less, it means there was in fact care there, and if you COULDN'T care less it means there was none [care] there to begin with - god!!!!

Re:Gramar Sholar (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838437)

It's 'IT'S', you fucking cunt!

Re:Gramar Sholar (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838723)

"I could care less" is the most common phrase indicating sarcasm in English.

"I couldn't care less" is a hyper corrective variant of the phrase used by people who don't understand its contextual sarcasm.

You're wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46839201)

David Mitchell has something to say about that... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om7O0MFkmpw ;-)

Re:You're wrong (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46841061)

David Mitchell has something to say about that... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om7O0MFkmpw ;-)

I trust linguists over some self-appointed loudmouth any day. Anyone who just can't accept the idiomatic expression "I could care less" is someone desperately attempting to believe languages work in a logical manner despite the clear contemporary and historical evidence otherwise.

If I suggest it's raining cats and dogs, would you take such an expression literally? If you should fail a math exam, and I suggest you're consequently a genius, would you recognize the sarcasm?

Grammarians are some of the worst offenders in exercising pedantry over common sense. Common sense, of course, while unscientific, is highly linked to our linguistic communication patterns in all its imperfections. To put it succinctly, your own communication pattern may be steeped in formal logic, but there are far more interesting ways to communicate in English.

Re:Gramar Sholar (1)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | about 4 months ago | (#46840439)

"I could care less" is the most common phrase indicating sarcasm in English.

Only amongst morons.

Re:Gramar Sholar (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46840811)

"I could care less" is the most common phrase indicating sarcasm in English.

Only amongst morons.

Right. I guess you mean morons such as Harvard linguist Steven Pinker.

Pedants are so charmingly quixotic when they're wrong. Either that, or they're just a bunch of assholes, perhaps both.

Re:Gramar Sholar (1)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | about 4 months ago | (#46841177)

I guess you mean morons such as Harvard linguist Steven Pinker.

Well, Anonymous Coward, I don't know the gentleman in question, but if he says "I could care less" to indicate that in fact he *couldn't* care less about a topic, then yes, Mr. Pinker is a moron.

Re:Gramar Sholar (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46841373)

I guess you mean morons such as Harvard linguist Steven Pinker.

Well, Anonymous Coward, I don't know the gentleman in question, but if he says "I could care less" to indicate that in fact he *couldn't* care less about a topic, then yes, Mr. Pinker is a moron.

You must be a genius .

Re:Gramar Sholar (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about 4 months ago | (#46841845)

I've read the Harvard Business Review guide to quality writing. I am convinced it degraded my writing ability.

I would suggest the fourth edition of William Strunk, Jr.'s and E.B. White's small volume, "The Elements of Style". Avoid Harvard garbage.

Re:Gramar Sholar (1)

fuzzywig (208937) | about 4 months ago | (#46841231)

In UK English it's always 'couldn't'. "I could care less" just isn't used over here, it wouldn't make sense.

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838409)

Do you care less? You have given us no information except the fact your caring is non-zero.
Forget it you will never learn, and the rest of us couldn't care less anymore.

Re: So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838773)

Every time I see this, I laugh. I guess sarcasm is lost on 'the rest of you. '

Re: So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46839127)

How is it sarcasm ("a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt")?

Re: So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46839171)

I prefer something more akin to the recent and more to-the-point "zero fucks given" and its variants.

Re:So... (1)

Brainguy (12519) | about 4 months ago | (#46838221)

Close enough.

Re:So... (0)

cephalien (529516) | about 4 months ago | (#46838095)

I say let them try. Can't be any worse than the amount we've collectively spent on reality TV.

Oblig. (4, Funny)

Cryacin (657549) | about 4 months ago | (#46838007)

Re:Oblig. (2)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838051)

I was thinking of just that xkcd when I read TFS. Did not realize till now that it was xkcd #1337.

Re:Oblig. (1)

rbf (2305) | about 4 months ago | (#46838463)

Best on-topic post ever!

Re:Oblig. (0, Troll)

inasity_rules (1110095) | about 4 months ago | (#46839001)

So, I came here for an intelligent discussion on the technical challenges involved. I found just trolls and jokes. Clearly I am in the wrong place.

Re:Oblig. (4, Funny)

rbf (2305) | about 4 months ago | (#46839015)

You must be new here!

Re:Oblig. (1)

inasity_rules (1110095) | about 4 months ago | (#46839031)

You would think, but I actually lurked as an AC for ages before joining. Slashdot does occasionally produce interesting discussions. Over the many years I have been here, I have seen a few.

Re:Oblig. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46839335)

Wooosh! You must be new here.

Re:Oblig. (1)

inasity_rules (1110095) | about 4 months ago | (#46839361)

No, I got the joke, I just didn't consider it very good.

Re:Oblig. (2)

causality (777677) | about 4 months ago | (#46840615)

No, I got the joke, I just didn't consider it very good.

Slashdot is odd. Most other places, jokes are considered good if they are clever, unexpected, witty, amusing, and most of all, ORIGINAL (around here, most jokes like that will offend someone's sacred cow and get modded as -1 Troll).

Here, jokes are most likely to be enjoyed, encountered, and/or modded up to +5 Funny if they are repetitive, predictable, expected, tiresome memes.

This pattern is so consistent and observable that I think a conclusion about it can be made: slashdot is filled with insecure (and perceived or real) outcasts who have a certain desperation to feel like they fit into a culture of likeminded people. If you view it that way, suddenly the irrational celebration of the ten millionth "sharks with lasers on their heads" joke makes sense. If you view it that way, the hostility they often show when you reject or even question their brand of humor also makes sense.

It's sort of like when you were in high school and the more "average" people suddenly adopted the mannerisms, gestures, and speech patterns of the latest big movie or TV show, all the time pretending that they have always expressed themselves that way. The terror of being an individual! No meme is too repetitive, no joke too lame if it offers even a phony escape from that!

Re:Oblig. (2)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | about 4 months ago | (#46841207)

Here, jokes are most likely to be enjoyed, encountered, and/or modded up to +5 Funny if they are repetitive, predictable, expected, tiresome memes.

In Soviet Russia, joke tell you!

Re:Oblig. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46839797)

So, I came here for an intelligent discussion on the technical challenges involved. I found just trolls and jokes. Clearly I am in the wrong place.

Perhaps you would like to try some other sites that are out there, where you aren't considered the audience, but a real person taking part in discussion:

https://soylentnews.org/

https://pipedot.org/

Re:Oblig. (1)

Vintowin (1476905) | about 4 months ago | (#46839837)

Wow. just took a look at both sites, as I am always in the hunt for new sites.. 10 comments on a story was one of the more active ones. Not really a big crowd over there yet...

Re:Oblig. (1)

causality (777677) | about 4 months ago | (#46840629)

Wow. just took a look at both sites, as I am always in the hunt for new sites.. 10 comments on a story was one of the more active ones. Not really a big crowd over there yet...

Most of the time you must choose between quality and quantity.

Having both has been known to occur ... for a little while ... but it's very rare.

Re:Oblig. (1)

Agent0013 (828350) | about 4 months ago | (#46839991)

I think it's kind of funny how the slashdot community uses xkcd comics pretty regularly by posting just the link. It always reminds me of the joke where everyone just shouts out the number of the joke and the rest of the group laughs. I have pasted the joke below for those who have not heard it before.

In a bar in a remote Alaskan town, a newcomer hears people yell out numbers (#23!, #56, etc.) and then everyone laughs. He asks the guy next to him what's going on, and he says the jokes have been told so many times, people just yell out their numbers instead of retelling them. So he yells out #27! but nobody laughs. The guy next to him says, "Some people can tell a joke, and some people can't."

Re (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46840763)

I think it's fucking sad, and I often point out how unfunny and unoriginal the faggots on this site are when they link to a predictable xkcd. The one linked to in this discussion is actually relevant and funny in this context, though.

And I completely agree with the post above where the author called everyone here out on having to fit in because they're antisocial little nerds.

Save VIGER (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838017)

No way! If we rescue it, then it will never have the chance to transform into a super-intelligent alien entity!

Re:Save VIGER (2)

Adriax (746043) | about 4 months ago | (#46838369)

V'GER.
Wrong probe anyway, VoyaGER is far beyond recovery with current technology and politics.

Re:Save VIGER (2, Insightful)

AK Marc (707885) | about 4 months ago | (#46838611)

Catching Voyager is within our tech. The return trip is beyond our capability. The politics are irrelevant.

dat's v'ger, man (1)

turkeydance (1266624) | about 4 months ago | (#46838077)

kain't y'all spel wurth spit?

Will the taxpayers be on the hook for this one? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838117)

Seems pretty stupid...

Satellite smash (1)

Solid StaTe_1 (446406) | about 4 months ago | (#46838161)

So, do they have a large insurance policy? If the re-orbit goes wrong and it smashes into other satellites or space debris, who is liable?

Re:Satellite smash (4, Informative)

iroll (717924) | about 4 months ago | (#46838293)

Liability insurance would be cheaper than sending you to a community college class about statistics and probability.

Re:Satellite smash (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about 4 months ago | (#46838417)

A likely story.

Re:Satellite smash (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838451)

Liability insurance would be cheaper than sending you to a community college class about statistics and probability.

Cheaper still: sending you to a wood shop class to get that stick out of your ass.

Re:Satellite smash (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838499)

It is a wooden dildo with a condom on it, idiot

Re:Satellite smash (1)

Lumpy (12016) | about 4 months ago | (#46839439)

You havent seen how badly Solid_StaTe_1 drives...

Re:Satellite smash (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838741)

Hi, this is Dennis Wingo, co-project lead for this effort.

There is no need for insurance as the probability of collision is extremely small, far less than for satellites in any other orbit. At no time is this orbit coming even as close as geosynchronous orbit.

Re:Satellite smash (0)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about 4 months ago | (#46841875)

A man who doesn't understand insurance. Amusing.

Re:Satellite smash (1)

JWSmythe (446288) | about 4 months ago | (#46838913)

Check their video. It sounded like they wanted to put it in orbit around the Earth. Their video shows it parking out around SEL1, out where ACE is on the 16th year of it's 5 year gig.

So, they don't want to recover it. They just want to park it an awful long way from home. I misread TFS, and was trying to figure out how they'd design, build, and launch a recovery vehicle in 40 days. That would have been really cool though.

Re:Satellite smash (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about 4 months ago | (#46841887)

You seriously do not want to enter Shadesmar on Sel.

Pretty interesting, until... (4, Insightful)

The Grim Reefer (1162755) | about 4 months ago | (#46838205)

From TFA: "If successful ISEE-3 will spend its retirement as a platform for citizen science, with smartphone apps—and a twitter feed"

Perhaps it would be better to let it drift off into space and die with some dignity after all.

Re:Pretty interesting, until... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838469)

NASA has abandoned far more capable spacecraft than this one, shutting them down terminally. There is just not the funding to keep every single one going. But this could be a precedent and offer the possibility that other vehicles could be transferred to public or maybe private hands. Its a sensitive matter because these are publicly funded vehicles but in my opinion, there are space probes that could be fairly transferred to continue service. ISEE-3 is not an aging beloved pet. Its metal and silicon and if it had heart, it would tell you to call it home and put it back to work!

Re:Pretty interesting, until... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838747)

Hi this is Dennis Wingo, co project lead for the ISEE-3 reboot project.

There is still a lot of very good use that this satellite can be put to. It can be used as a real time monitor for space weather or as a tool for education. That is dignified.

Re:Pretty interesting, until... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46840487)

Another "space weather satellite" isn't needed. Neither is a "tool for education" when it won't do anything that hasn't been done several times before. Very few people care about regurgitating stuff that's been done for decades. You need to come up with something better than that. If you can't, let ISEE-3 die.

Re:Pretty interesting, until... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838855)

What is wrong with accessing the spacecraft via smartphone apps - can you explain this without appeal to emotion? Smartphones are the most ubiquitous computing device, available to almost everyone in the world.

Re:Pretty interesting, until... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46839189)

Exactly, If you're going to use this as an education tool I think it would be good to make it available (even if only partially so) through a tool that just about anyone will have access to: smartphone or other. Much better than keeping it "locked" in a lab that you would only access by travelling to a specific location to gain physical access to the lab where it's held ...or whatever.

Just as long as the "app" can actually be something useful and not some kind of gimicky thing or, worse, a slideshow with random blinking lights like a '60s scifi show.

Clean Up Your Shit In The Ocean From The Launch (0)

zenlessyank (748553) | about 4 months ago | (#46838243)

After you clean that up, then you can work on the rest of the trash in the ocean. Then maybe you can feed & educate some less fortunates from your hometown.... And about 3,000,000 other things that are more important... Then you can do this stupid shit.

Re:Clean Up Your Shit In The Ocean From The Launch (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838477)

Then maybe you can feed & educate some less fortunates from your hometown

misfortunates? oh yeah. that's a nice way to say it! obviously you mean niggers.

it's as though worshiping the street criminal thug image isnt compatible with ever learning or achieveing anything. its not really race and genetics. its priorities.

Re:Clean Up Your Shit In The Ocean From The Launch (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838537)

Why are you posting here, did you run out of trash in the ocean? Or are you capable of doing more than one thing in your lifetime?

In for $18 (4, Insightful)

Quinn_Inuit (760445) | about 4 months ago | (#46838301)

Let's bring this baby to life!

Warning... grammar police! (4, Informative)

NewtonsLaw (409638) | about 4 months ago | (#46838339)

"a very unique milestone in space exploration"

WTF?

"unique" is not a relative adjective. There are no degrees of "unique". Something is either unique or it's not.

Aaargh!

That's why there are no such words as uniquer or uniquest

</rant>

Re:Warning... grammar police! (4, Informative)

hawguy (1600213) | about 4 months ago | (#46838427)

"a very unique milestone in space exploration"

WTF?

"unique" is not a relative adjective. There are no degrees of "unique". Something is either unique or it's not.

Aaargh!

That's why there are no such words as uniquer or uniquest

</rant>

Funny thing about English - many words have more than one meaning:

http://www.merriam-webster.com... [merriam-webster.com]

unique adjective \yu-nk\

...

3: unusual <a very unique ball-point pen> <we were fairly unique, the sixty of us, in that there wasn't one good mixer in the bunch — J. D. Salinger>

Usage Discussion of UNIQUE

Many commentators have objected to the comparison or modification (as by somewhat or very) of unique, often asserting that a thing is either unique or it is not. Objections are based chiefly on the assumption that unique has but a single absolute sense, an assumption contradicted by information readily available in a dictionary....

Re:Warning... grammar police! (1)

El Puerco Loco (31491) | about 4 months ago | (#46839037)

but the "un" in unique comes from the latin unus, which means one. you can't be relatively unique any more than you can be relatively dead.

Re:Warning... grammar police! (1)

hawguy (1600213) | about 4 months ago | (#46839109)

but the "un" in unique comes from the latin unus, which means one. you can't be relatively unique any more than you can be relatively dead.

Perhaps if we were in Ancient Rome, you might have a point. However, while many words in English have their origins in Latin, their modern meanings have deviated from the original Latin roots.

Re (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46840803)

He knows that. He just wanted to sound smart, because he is very unfulfilled in life.

Re:Warning... grammar police! (1)

Stuarticus (1205322) | about 4 months ago | (#46839141)

And that is why no-one has multiple unicycles.

Re:Warning... grammar police! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46839743)

I have three unicycles.

Re:Warning... grammar police! (1)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | about 4 months ago | (#46839913)

And that is why no-one has multiple unicycles.

No, but it IS why noone has a unicycle with two wheels.

Re:Warning... grammar police! (1)

oojah (113006) | about 4 months ago | (#46840005)

I'm not arguing grammar, but this may be of interest.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

almost unique perspective (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46840227)

Many commentators have objected to the comparison or modification (as by somewhat or very) of unique, often asserting that a thing is either unique or it is not. Objections are based chiefly on the assumption that unique has but a single absolute sense, an assumption contradicted by information readily available in a dictionary....

So, you give "an exception that proves the rule"?

Re:Warning... grammar police! (1)

camperdave (969942) | about 4 months ago | (#46838531)

An ace may be unique in your poker hand, but it isn't unique in the deck. Thus it is more unique in your hand than in the deck. If my hand is the two of hearts, the three, queen, and king of diamonds and the ace of spades, each card is unique, but the two of hearts is more unique than the king of diamonds because there are other diamonds but no other hearts. The ace of spades is the uniquest, because not only are there no other cards of that rank and suit, there are also no other cards of that color.

Re:Warning... grammar police! (1)

TubeSteak (669689) | about 4 months ago | (#46838539)

"infinity" is not a relative adjective. There are no degrees of "infinity". Something is either infinite or it's not.

Aaargh!

That's why there are no such words as infiniter or infinitest

Or maybe there can be degrees of uniqueness.

Re:Warning... grammar police! (4, Informative)

sconeu (64226) | about 4 months ago | (#46838783)

There are no degrees of "infinity". Something is either infinite or it's not.

Aleph-null and Aleph-one would like a word with you.

Re:Warning... grammar police! (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 4 months ago | (#46838981)

Understandable whoosh.

Re:Warning... grammar police! (1)

Ecuador (740021) | about 4 months ago | (#46839461)

His point is that there is no infiniter infinitest, but there ARE degrees of infinity. If you read it again in relation to the post it responds to you will get it.

infinity is NOT unique (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46840259)

There are no degrees of "infinity". Something is either infinite or it's not.

There are indeed "degrees" of infinity. The infinity of the integers is not the infinity of the real numbers (there are more reals.)

Re:Warning... grammar police! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838585)

Somebody done needs to learn gooder English!

Re: Warning... grammar police! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838845)

There is now. You have the uniquest post my dear sir.

Re:Warning... grammar police! (1)

JWSmythe (446288) | about 4 months ago | (#46838871)

uniquilessnessishis?

You know I couldn't resist after a rant like that. :)

Re:Warning... grammar police! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46839849)

uniquilessnessishis?

You know I couldn't resist after a rant like that. :)

I Can HAz bee uniquilessnessishis?

Cinsearlyer,

Tha Catz

Re:Warning... grammar police! (1)

sFurbo (1361249) | about 4 months ago | (#46840149)

That view makes the word "unique" close to meaningless.
Disregarding objects where quantum mechanics are the dominant theory, everything is unique. No two LEGO bricks are completely identical at the atomic level, so they are all at least a little unique. If there are no degrees of unique, they are all unique, and as unique as this spacecraft, or the moon, or the George Washington.
So it merely becomes a word for "a thing that we can distinguish from other things given enough effort", which is another way to say "a thing that is not primarily controlled by quantum mechanics".
We don't need a word for that concept.

Re:Warning... grammar police! (1)

schlachter (862210) | about 4 months ago | (#46841141)

There are degrees of uniqueness. Try developing an algorithm that sorts data on uniqueness and you will realize this.

It's sure to be a really gripping smart phone app. (2)

Old Fatty Baldman (3630557) | about 4 months ago | (#46838375)

*Beep* HELIUM DETECTED *Beep* COSMIC RAY *Beep* MORE HELIUM *Beep* AIR'S KINDA THIN UP HERE *Beep* FOR GOD'S SAKE GUYS LET ME DIE *Beep*

Re:It's sure to be a really gripping smart phone a (1)

TheDarkMaster (1292526) | about 4 months ago | (#46839595)

Hahaha, sounds like the Kerbal Space Program sensors reporting

Acquisition methods (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838517)

The signal will have deteriorated. Dark clouds mean rain if it is not too cold. Catalytic converters will be needed to reduce emissions and pass the smog test here in California.

Re:Acquisition methods (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838529)

Troll!

Re:Acquisition methods (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838535)

Nonsense. The signal is generated by the ground based station and the satellite couples the wavelength of the received signal to the Bellhoven frequency.

Twitch (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838837)

We should let twitch crowd control it and see for how long we can keep it alive!

I remember that show! (2)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838957)

The Vulture has Landed!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvage_1

Re:I remember that show! (1)

Capt.DrumkenBum (1173011) | about 4 months ago | (#46841491)

God I loved that show! I found a torrent of the movie a few years ago, but I have never been able to find the series.
Hell, at this point I would even pay for it.

Why money? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46838971)

Ok it looks like a nice plan, but what is not clear to me is:
Why does it cost money? Why do they need funding?
The spacecraft is already there, there are more than enough idle radio telescopes around the world that can be
used for free, I presume the people who want to do this do it in their spare time and don't need a salary,
so why don't they just ask for approval from the spacecraft owner and go for it?

Sigh (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46839017)

1) You don't need a space hacker for this, you need a financial hacker.
2) Operating any new spacecraft with brand spanking new procedures, trained personnel and lots of rehearsals is a damn pain.
3) Operating any old spacecraft that was designed, built and operated by others, is three times as much trouble as (2) when it is possible at all.
4) The only thing engineers will learn from this is points 1, 2 and 3. I'm telling them this for free.

Re:Sigh (1)

rev0lt (1950662) | about 4 months ago | (#46839817)

1) You're a short-sighted moron, but that we already knew;
2) If crowdfunding of these kind of projects work, we'll see many more in the future - even if it fails its goal;
3) Learning engineering tricks form a viable, proven piece of tech that went where no man has been before is priceless. You can simulate whatever you want, but in the end I'll take a proven piece of gear to a simulation any day;
4) Your opinion's worth is way inflated. Even for free, its still overpriced.

Space Pirates (1)

goarilla (908067) | about 4 months ago | (#46839119)

Let the satellite hijacking begin.

Cheaper to Outsource (1)

retroworks (652802) | about 4 months ago | (#46839519)

It's a "make vs. buy" decision. The cheaper thing is to release it open source and wait for someone in Guangdong to make a knock off and buy in online for $2M.

what??? (0)

Matthew Brand (3631331) | about 4 months ago | (#46840127)

How is a hugely outdated spacecraft a teaching tool again???

Re:what??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46840725)

How is a hugely outdated spacecraft a teaching tool again???

'Cause it's in space...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

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

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

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

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