Look a few articles down, and you will see one about FIRST robotics. Robotics is absolutely a requirement of any future space program.

Yet, slashdot, a web site for geeks, has a comment post count of 6.

This by itself is hugely important - there is little to no interest in a fundamental technology of the future.

Couple that with the US's current anti-science sentiment, and NASA being a science department of a funding challenged government, and the US days of space exploration is done for a while. Close NASA, sell the assets to the Chinese, let someone else take their rightful place as leaders.

Funny thing is professionals that should be fired can be prominent members on open source projects.

I made no such leaps of conclusions. You are pathetically digging in hopes to somehow convince ... yourself? ...

I admit, I have not written SLL code, but I have written diffie-helman, and other borderline classified cryptology code, using an in-house written large-integer math, written by a kid who worked for ME. He just also happen to be part of SSLeay, ever hear of it?

Your assumption that writing SSL is too difficult for an amature has nothing to do with anything, as well as being fundamentally wrong, and proof who is out of their league.

would you call that whining? or twitching? I'm having a hard time classifying it..

Absolutely - trolling to me is getting idiots to prove themselves incompetent. The more whining and twitching and crying I see, the better.

I have yet to see one valid counter point - no matter how 'subjective' I am.

No, terrible analogy.

Let's try a different one;

Michael Jordan is a paid professional. You are not, but because you are free, thousands cheer for you, after all, you never miss a basket (because thousands cheer for you).

Blam, you miss a basket. Only fucking idiots would still be cheering for you.

I think the quote that comes to mind is "how many cockroaches do you need to find in your bowl of spaghetti?"

I'm simply pointing out, that a talking bullet of open source, is no longer valid. Unfortunately it is a bullet needed to counter so many other negative bullets.

And let's be clear, you have never met/heard of a prominent security researcher who favoured open source over closed source. You may have met someone who thought they were all that, but in fact were not. Open vs close source has to do with public access to source code. Anyone 'prominent' who was anyone, would be offered a look at the closed source, if it was indeed for security evaluation. As much as I agree obfuscation does not lead to good security, it certainly does not detract from it. Had this code of openSSL not been publicly available, it could have been fixed before most of the internet was subject to people trying to take advantage of its errors. Sorry, hard reality.

man the truth stings, doesn't it?

Modded flame bait, with 0 argument against, in fact several replies in support of.

Totally validates the sig eh?

Look open source noobs, get over it. Understanding reality is half the battle towards accomplishing something.

Feel free to mod this as flamebait - it was totally intended as such, and modding so will give me great satisfaction.

You are right, it is nothing like closing the door after the horses got out, it is more like closing the door after all the horses are dead.

Multiple eyes on code, security, these are things that are great about open source, except they aren't. This is a prime example of how bugs get through anyhow, major bugs. So it is now shown beyond a shadow of anyones doubt, open source is NOT superior in these respects.

Design and QA are 2 more things open source does not do anywhere near as well as closed source. It doesn't take much of a leap to understand open source it what it is, a free less than ideal solution that is NO competitor to closed source.

The problem is that you think the iPad is the problem.

LEGOs can be used infinite ways, to create all kinds of things from the imagination. Guess what? So can an iPad.

It is the lazy f'n parents, who take the easiest way out to pacify their over protected brats, and wonder why they cry when they don't get what they want later in life.

Again, results. The guy with the wing has them, you with your quad do not.

Now I do know the guy who sends up a red on an octo fitted with infared in bad weather. So there are some special cases when a multi rotor might be more appropriate, but day to day SAR, no, not even in the ballpark. If altitude is a problem you put something other than a POS GoPro on it. You arent trying to find anything real time anyhow. Actually, never mind. I'm starting to doubt you have ever done anything real, just your imagination.

hot off the press - like 10 minutes ago; http://www.suasnews.com/2014/0... includes a link to the faa appeal

well, it's still in an appeals process, so I wouldnt say decided, but at the moment the FAA is on the losing side for sure.

you have no idea what you are talking about. Butt out while you can. This dude has been doing it for a while, last I read I think he had located 11 deceased children, and he uses a wing. How's your quad record?

Quad's do not have the range, period. It is common sense, called glide.

wow - I expected a few of you to know what has been going on.

The FAA fined someone $10,000 not long ago. His lawyer filed a motion to dismiss. The administrative judge you name, indicated the FAA has no current authority to do dick (pirker vs. FAA).

The FAA has appealed, but at the moment, the ruling is The FAA doesn't have dick. Even with the appeal, because of how the ruling is written (somewhat intentionally I ber), the stay from appeal also means the FAA doesn't have dick.

If the FAA thinks they are going to force a humanitarian effort with support of local law enforcement to cease in order to extend their dick, guess what is going to get stepped on?

holy shit. the fact you think OSS software is even in the same league as Adobe apps is an indicator you are totally clueless.