Don't Desert Hubble

"Scott M. Kozel" wrote in message
...
"Bootstrap Bill" wrote:

"Jorge R. Frank" wrote:
(Karl Hallowell) wrote:

Sorry about the long Google links. But don't know of a better way to
reference old USENET posts.

http://www.makeashorterlink.com/
http://tinyurl.com/

One problem. The Google archives may last for centuries, if not longer.
Will
tinyurl.com or makeashorterlink.com last as long? I recommend using
both,
just in case these services go under.

TinyURL claims that they are permanent.

Ayup. And I know one company we wanted to continue renting rack space from
didn't want our business because they wanted a more established company like
Enron. Hmm... last I checked, we're still paying our bills on time with
that company's competition. I don't think Enron still is.

Permanent is as long as the money doesn't run out.

"Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)" wrote:

"Scott M. Kozel" wrote
"Bootstrap Bill" wrote:
"Jorge R. Frank" wrote:
(Karl Hallowell) wrote:

Sorry about the long Google links. But don't know of a better way to
reference old USENET posts.

http://www.makeashorterlink.com/
http://tinyurl.com/

One problem. The Google archives may last for centuries, if not longer. Will
tinyurl.com or makeashorterlink.com last as long? I recommend using both,
just in case these services go under.

TinyURL claims that they are permanent.

Ayup. And I know one company we wanted to continue renting rack space from
didn't want our business because they wanted a more established company like
Enron. Hmm... last I checked, we're still paying our bills on time with
that company's competition. I don't think Enron still is.

Permanent is as long as the money doesn't run out.

Very long URLs are usually associated with newspaper articles and Google
archive posts, neither which is by any means permanent (Deja News was
bought by Google several years ago, and someone else may eventually buy
the Google archive).

In a Usenet discussion, TinyURL does fine, IMO, as far as any realistic
definition of "permanent" goes with respect to URLs changing or being
deleted.

(Karl Hallowell) writes:

"Chosp" wrote in message news:hTHXb.69784$F15.14540@fed1read06...
"Charles Buckley" wrote in message
...

The ET tanks alone costs more than the replacement equipment
for Hubble.

References, please?

[snip]
Sorry about the long Google links. But don't know of a better way to
reference old USENET posts.

All articles should have "Message-ID" header with an ID with which
newsreaders should be able to grab the article, until your news
server drops it, after which you can get it using the "Message ID"
field of "http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search".

This article has two IDs in the quote and one in the header.

It's probably not quite as reliable as the long Google URL, because
it's subject to duplication, but it's sure a lot shorter.

"Karl Hallowell" wrote ...
Meanwhile as Chosp mentions in this post, there is $180 million cost
with the replacement equipment for the Hubble telescope.


http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...com%26rnum%3D1

Sorry about the long Google links. But don't know of a better way to
reference old USENET posts.

Don't be sorry, learn to trim.

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...2%40fed1read06

Who needs a tiny url? That should be one line on practically anybody's newsreader.

In sci.space.policy "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)" wrote:

Permanent is as long as the money doesn't run out.


But this equally applies to tinyurl and google.

--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++

"Sander Vesik" wrote ...
In sci.space.policy "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)" wrote:

Permanent is as long as the money doesn't run out.

But this equally applies to tinyurl and google.

That applies _unequally_ to tinyurl and google.

Let's put a little (fictional) money on it to make this more interesting.

Suppose both you and I inherit 10,000 pounds from an eccentric gambler.
These ammounts of money are placed into separate numbered bank accounts
and the solicitor Mr. Google is given the account information to both to hand
over to the relevant party when contacted.

I'm told how to find Mr. Google, but you're only given Mr TinyUrl's
contact details. Don't worry though because he can put you in contact with
Mr. Google.

However there's a catch - when contacted by either me or you both
Mr. Google and Mr TinyUrl have been instructed to roll a fair six sided
die. If they get a 1 they have been instructed to refuse to divulge
their information to that particular person contacting them. Then, and
thereafter.

Which of us got the better deal?

"Jorge R. Frank" writes:

(Explorer8939) wrote in
m:

There is no question that the NASA of today is less risk tolerant than
the NASA of the Apollo era.

As is the rest of the country. A disease we will have to get over if we are
ever to go beyond LEO again.

One only has to examine something like cars to see that this is true.
Look at the availability and cost of "safety" equipment on cars in
the 60's and compare that to the availability and cost of "safety"
equipment today. In that time span we've even passed laws *requiring*
the use of seat belts.

The law making US public is very risk averse.

Jeff
--
Remove "no" and "spam" from email address to reply.
If it says "This is not spam!", it's surely a lie.

"Sander Vesik" wrote in message
...
In sci.space.policy "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
wrote:

Permanent is as long as the money doesn't run out.


But this equally applies to tinyurl and google.

Yes, but now you're entering a second failure point. In any case I was just
commenting on the use of the word permanent.

Nothing truly is and in the dotcom world even less so.



--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++

jeff findley wrote:
[...]
One only has to examine something like cars to see that this is true.
Look at the availability and cost of "safety" equipment on cars in
the 60's and compare that to the availability and cost of "safety"
equipment today. In that time span we've even passed laws *requiring*
the use of seat belts.

The law making US public is very risk averse.

Jeff


And one only has to note that more people die in automobiles than in
planes, that more people are maimed in automobiles than in combat,
that many of the victims are small children, and that driving
conditions are often worse than they were in the 1960's (higher
traffic density, longer commutes, more construction projects and more
worn out infrastructure), and I'm really amazed at the bravery of
people who take classic cars onto the freeway.

/dps

"dave schneider" wrote in message om...

And one only has to note that more people die in automobiles than in
planes, that more people are maimed in automobiles than in combat,
that many of the victims are small children, and that driving
conditions are often worse than they were in the 1960's (higher
traffic density, longer commutes, more construction projects and more
worn out infrastructure), and I'm really amazed at the bravery of
people who take classic cars onto the freeway.


They do it because it's their patriotic duty to put their lives on the
line for the good and the wealth of the nation. But I don't expect
the likes of *you* to understand!



--
__ "A good leader knows when it's best to ignore the __
('__` screams for help and focus on the bigger picture." '__`)
//6(6; ©OOL mmiv :^)^\\
`\_-/ http://home.t-online.de/home/ulrich....lmann/redbaron \-_/'