To be clear to everyone here: The primary reason why Artemis 3 is not landing is because the billionaire-run Human Landing System contractors are not performing to schedule. The landers are just not ready.
In this test, Artemis 3 will dock with a starship in Earth orbit, but the starship will not even have a cabin interior fitted.
In any case, whatever the scheme is, it should be voted upon by our Congressional representatives in Congress and enacted by Congress, and signed into law by the President. That is how the H1-B visa was created in the first place, and that is how taxes are raised in this country: with representation.
It's pretty common for natural gas electric plants to use Brayton cycle turbines, which is the same thermodynamic cycle that the turbojet engines on airplanes use. But you can optimize the designs on the ground for efficiency (and zero thrust) instead of thrust-to-weight.
It's also common to use "combined cycle" technology which mashes the Brayton cycle engine together with an older-style steam loop for extra efficiency.
After reading the article, I think they're just saying they installed some miniaturized natural gas plants. I don't think they're literally running aircraft engines on the ground.
Most systems I use will keep a sudo authentication session open for several minutes, so you don't have to repeatedly enter your password on every single command.
I think the poop bags were mainly stowed into lockers on the sides of the descent module. They're not just piled up on the ground.
Edit: Correction. This research suggests that the procedure was to "jettison" the "waste receptacle," containing any sealed poop bags, food wrappers, and other trash. "Jettison" definitely sounds more like tossing stuff out the door.
I also want to point out that maybe 96 bags were provisioned and left. But almost certainly most of those remained empty. Pooping into a bag in the LM in close proximity to your colleague is not an easy or pleasant experience. Astronauts had access to lomotil and they were conditioned on what NASA called a "low residue diet" for the entire duration of the flight and pre-flight quarantine. The early flights were on the surface for less than 24 hours. So there was a lot of opportunity and incentive to just avoid having a bowel movement on the moon.
There's also a radio transcript from Apollo 16 that suggests that, on that flight, this material was transferred off the returning LM back onto CM and presumably returned to Earth.
That's what a district court judge will do when they know their work is going to be heavily scrutinized on appeal. They're mainly writing to persuade appellate judges because nobody likes getting reversed and overruled.
Okay. But did it have one of those steam whistles, like on the old railroad? I feel like it would have done better on the market with a nice choo choo.
But it would still be more expensive, and still have a latency issue.
Imagine a public counterstrike server where there's an extra 30-50 ms delay between when you hit the strafe key and when you start moving.
Alternatively, Counterstrike or another shooter could defeat wall hacks if the server only told the client about player positions in the client's line of sight. But then the Counterstrike player executing a peek would see their opponent pop in 30-50 ms after they gain line of sight. Much Counterstrike gameplay is built upon the short interval between when you see someone, and when you click on their head with your hit scan weapon.
Furthermore, latency is not going to go away for Internet play. The speed of light travel time to circumnavigate earth is 125 ms. That gives a theoretical worst case minimum ping of 62.5. Actual pings I see from my ISP are approaching the speed of light order of magnitude, assuming they are only traversing North America.
The traditional rationale, back in the time of the boomer shooters, is that the server doesn't have enough computational power to update and control the game state for all clients at once, with acceptable latency.
When I was a kid, MS and LA were #50 and #49 in all of these kinds of lists. It amazes me to see all these other states racing to tank their scores down to the bottom.
The Constitution specifies that the justices and other federal judges shall serve "during good behavior." This is interpreted as a lifetime appointment, subject to impeachment. That's why this proposal is written as a constitutional amendment. It would need a 2/3 majority in both houses, and then 3/4 of state legislatures would need to ratify.
There's another idea floating around to impose de facto term limits by regular federal law by rotating justices in and out of lower federal courts at defined intervals.
There are also a bunch of other things that an angry Congress could do to rein in the court (using regular federal law):
they could use the good behavior clause to impose a written ethics code, or the CLE requirement that another commenter mentioned.
they can set the court's jurisdiction (except for suits between states). They can take jurisdiction away.
On another jurisdictional topic: currently nearly all of the court's docket is discretionary. They get to decide which cases to take up. Congress can take that power away and force the court to hear appeals on a mandatory basis again.
Congress controls the annual budget. They get to decide whether the justices have money for clerks, robes, and office supplies or not.
Congress can specify what dates the court is in session and for how long. At least one time, this power was used to try to prevent the court from meeting.
Likewise, for a large part of the court's history, Congress decreed that the court meet in the basement of the Capitol. Not the big fancy marble building. It could happen again.
as part of its oversight power, Congress has the power to subpoena justices to hearings and to grill them on their decisions on live TV. This actually happened to Justice Kennedy after Bush v. Gore.
In C and C++, the source character set is implementation defined. This means that each compiler sets its own rules about what characters are accepted. For example compilers could choose to accept ASCII or EBCDIC or Unicode, or some combination, etc.
So the ISO standard will say that ; character is the end of statement punctuation. But it is up to the compiler to say which character(s) or code point(s) represent the ISO ;.
The ISO standards also require compilers to define a separate execution character set to specify values that can be stored in char and used with the string library functions. The execution character set doesn't have to be the same as the source character set.
Edit: I should also mention that the rules for this stuff are changing a lot in ISO C23 and C++23. (Which standards I haven't yet personally adopted.) Basically the ISO 23 standards mandate compilers to support UTF-8 source files, and they map every source character in the ISO standard to its corresponding Unicode character.
I believe a lot of this turmoil in the marathon record is being driven by advances in shoe technology. We are in the middle of a classic tech boom pattern in running shoes. Designs are evolving very rapidly. New market entrants are disrupting the established players.
There's a lot of talk that this record was made possible by a specific Adidas Adizero shoe that cut a lot of weight off the shoe.
So I believe that the future of the marathon record will have a lot to do with how World Athletics chooses to regulate shoes. They introduced the first limits on shoes a few years ago, and I imagine they now need to wrestle with whether they want additional limits, like, say, a minimum weight.
On the other hand, it is now feasible for a regular person to walk into a store and purchase a pair of shoes that are illegal for racing, and not even realize it. Is that really something we want in our sport? A bunch of rules about qualifying shoes?
To be clear to everyone here: The primary reason why Artemis 3 is not landing is because the billionaire-run Human Landing System contractors are not performing to schedule. The landers are just not ready.
In this test, Artemis 3 will dock with a starship in Earth orbit, but the starship will not even have a cabin interior fitted.