So tonight at 1:30 am-ish the new Mars Rover, Curiosity, will, if all things go as planned, land gently on the surface near Gale Crater close to the Martian equator.

If I sound a little tentative it’s because there’s a lot that could go badly.

For one thing this whole separate rocket descender concept is a bit complicated.  The idea is that you don’t need the motors and fuel once you’re on the ground so you’re better off ditching them.  I think that stringing your mission critical cargo beneath another chunk of untested junk that could go spectacularly, amusingly, and expensively wrong is a mite…

ambitious.

But hey, I’m not a rocket scientist.

As I write NASA has already forgone their last course correction and is debating a final update to the data that the computers will use.  The rover has to land independent of radio control because light is slow and on a round trip to Mars takes just a little under half an hour.  If you’ve ever gamed over a sucky connection or are a high frequency trader you know what I’m talking about.

But people aren’t talking about that very real problem and are instead focused on the “Seven Minutes of Terror” that uses conventional atmospheric braking and includes a radio blackout from the plasma which will only be 50% or less (one way) of the regular everyday lag.

No one has a really good record at landing intact probes on Mars, though the United States has the best.  This is why last time out we sent both Opportunity AND Spirit in the expectation something would probably fail.

Instead they were both incredibly successful, far exceeding their designed objectives.

This time we have only 1 lander and it’s the size of an SUV, not a Golf Cart.  The mission is not to find life, but to determine if conditions on Mars could have supported the development of life.  I consider this a pretty settled question, but you can never know too much and actual results often lead to unexpected discoveries.

We will probably not know tonight, or even for the next week, whether things have gone as planned.  If the lander is even partly functional we can get some data, if not it would be 8 months to get there if we launched tomorrow.

However once down and functional Curiosity should prove much more capable than its predecessors.  It has nuclear power for one thing so we’ll be a lot less dependent on favorable storms.

And if you are a Deficit Hawk who likes to pretend money matters I invite you to compare the $2.5 Billion for the Curiosity program to the $23.7 Trillion we gave to the Banksters.  Even a non-rocket scientist can use a calculator to figure out that’s just barely over .0001%.

And because no frontier is final without Tiberius-

Here are some places you can stream the video commentary-

• PCMag- How to Watch the Mars Curiosity Rover Landing
• Los Angeles Times- Where you can watch Curiosity Mars landing coverage

Jon Stewart’s extended interview with Fred Guterl.

Our regular featured content-

• On This Day In History August 4 by TheMomCat
• Punting the Pundits by TheMomCat

And these featured articles-

• You’re Doing It Wrong!: Chick-fil-A Edition by: poligirl
• Health and Fitness News by: TheMomCat
• Overcoming The Odds by: TheMomCat
• My Little Town 20120801: The Gang by: Translator

Special sporting event on The Stars Hollow Gazette– XXX Olympiad.

Write more and often.  This is an Open Thread.

Crossposted from The Stars Hollow Gazette

I haven’t written a lot about Mitt Romney because it’s too painfully obvious that he’s a soulless, unprincipled waste of breath, the epitome of the sociopathic thieving greed heads who’ve ruined our environment and economy, as well as an out-of-touch selfish piece of shit who has utterly no empathy or understanding of anything not Mitt Romney.  It really is like the whole world disappears when he leaves the room for him.

I’d say his only natural talent is lying except he’s very bad at it.

Nor do I waste much time on Republicans as the Party is merely a haven for ignorant bigots and those who prey on their gullibility.  The only reason they survive at all is the Democratic Party resurrected them as a stalking horse for their own basic instincts to defraud and steal from the people of the United States, all 99.9% of us, for the benefit of their corporate masters.

Jon is not the only ‘liberal’ who misses the point.

Irony Appears Lost on Romney

By: Jon Walker, Firedog Lake

Friday August 3, 2012 9:31 am

The simple fact is that Romney has made claims about his tax returns that he refuses to provide proof for. The position of the Romney campaign is that the everyone should simply trust what Romney says about his taxes even though Romney won’t verify them by releasing his returns. Now that Reid is the one making claims about Romney’s tax returns, though, Romney ironically claims it is totally unacceptable for someone to make statements unless they are willing to provide the proof to back them up.

In the same interview Romney attacks Reid for not being willing to “put up” proof to back up his claims, Romney makes his own counterclaims that Reid is not telling the truth, while he himself is still refusing to “put up” the simple piece of proof that would show if Reid is wrong.

It really is that transparent, and it would be ‘irresponsible’ not to speculate.

The problem is that Democrats are lying too when they say what matters is ‘electoral victory’.

Reid Quadruples and Quintuples Down on Romney Tax Return Comments

By: David Dayen, Firedog Lake

Friday August 3, 2012 10:56 am

The liberal squishes deeply concerned with Reid “playing dirty” are sadly typical, but it’s not going to change Reid’s position.

…

In yet ANOTHER comment (quintupling down?), Reid welcomed Romney to Nevada by reiterating that he couldn’t be confirmed by the Senate to a Presidential appointment without releasing more tax returns, adding that “The contents of the one year of returns he has released would probably be enough to tank his nomination anyway: secret overseas bank accounts in Switzerland and the Cayman Islands, tax avoidance tricks and a lower tax rate than middle-class families pay.” He also connected the tax plan Romney has put out, the subject of a damning Tax Policy Center report this week, to the tax returns issue. Not only is the very rich Romney hiding his tax exposure, he’s planning as President to make millionaires pay less and the middle class pay more. “In short, Romney’s message to Nevadans is this: he won’t release his taxes, but he wants to raise yours.” That’s a winning slogan.

My final point is, and I’ve said this before, you can stop talking about Democrats being “weak.” They know how to play politics; none of them got into office as idealistic rubes. They can be tough. They can play dirty. They just don’t want to do that for things like genuine universal health care or increasing Social Security benefits or protecting the climate or ensuring workers’ rights to collective bargaining. When it’s about getting their guy re-elected, sure they’ll get tough. Just not on, you know, liberal policy, which isn’t really their main focus.

A government unresponsive to the needs of the people will inevitably fail.

Crossposted from The Stars Hollow Gazette

When Gridlock Works: Cybersecurity Bill Stuffed, For Now

By: David Dayen, Firedog Lake

Thursday August 2, 2012 11:06 am

The Senate, unable to come up with a schedule for amendments, blocked the cybersecurity bill today in an outcome that, despite being a result of Republican obstruction, satisfied Internet activists who had been urging a no vote.

…

He (Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid) decried the fact that meetings continued on amendments without a deal, and that the Chamber of Commerce, which opposes the legislation because they feel it still puts too many demands on business groups to maintain standards for resisting cyber attacks on public infrastructure, was driving the process. Lawmakers took out the mandatory standard prescriptions on businesses, but the Chamber of Commerce still finds the bill too stringent. “Republicans are running like scared cats” on the legislation, Reid said. “The Chamber of Commerce has now become the protector of our nation’s security.”

But if the Chamber is forcing Republicans to “run scared,” privacy groups and experts are running from the bill as well. Though they did get improvements from the truly awful CISPA bill that passed the House, most activist groups on the left paying attention to the bill still oppose it. The activist group Demand Progress generated 500,000 contacts to Congress opposing the bill, and the coalition Fight for the Future has been rallying against the bill as well.

…

The best hope for stopping these breaches of privacy for coming into being is to kill a cybersecurity bill that many experts have doubted is necessary, especially without the mandatory standards. Sometimes gridlock is a friend.

As with Keystone XL, Social Security, and Medicare/aid this is likely a temporary victory.  Versailles is convinced the proles have too much and want to take it away.  The solution is to fire them.

All.

Remember in November.

5 x Five – Colbert Report on Unions – TV Writers (03:48)

5 x Five – Colbert Report on Unions – Factory Workers (2:05)

Crossposted from The Stars Hollow Gazette

Bank official admits economists were to blame for recession

A top economist at the Bank of England has admitted that his profession should share the blame for the financial crisis and recession.

By Philip Aldrick, Economics Editor, The Telegraph

12:01AM BST 01 Aug 2012

Andy Haldane, executive director for financial stability at the Bank (of England), said economists misled policymakers in the years before the crisis by promoting a “blinkered” view of the world based on the assumption their theories were unfailingly correct.

…

He said the error was not driven by economists seeking financial gain but “the quest for certainty”. But their error was to think of the assumptions used to build economic models as cast-iron laws.

“A concept gets formalised and then gets socialised and then believed as an almost theological doctrine,” he said. “The notion of not knowing, of imperfect information, of uncertainty, got lost from economics and finance for the better part of 20 or 30 years.

“I think one of the great errors we as economists made was that we started believing the assumptions of economics, and saying things that made no intellectual sense. We started to believe that what were assumptions were actually a description of reality, and therefore that the models were a description of reality, and therefore were dependable for policy analysis.

“With hindsight, that was a pretty significant error.”

(h/t Naked Capitalism)

Just in case you think this will have any effect on faith cult not science voodoo academics-

Greenspan – I was wrong about the economy. Sort of

Andrew Clark in New York and Jill Treanor, The Guardian

Thursday 23 October 2008

A long-time cheerleader for deregulation, Greenspan admitted to a congressional committee yesterday that he had been “partially wrong” in his hands-off approach towards the banking industry and that the credit crunch had left him in a state of shocked disbelief. “I have found a flaw,” said Greenspan, referring to his economic philosophy. “I don’t know how significant or permanent it is. But I have been very distressed by that fact.”

It was the first time the man hailed for masterminding the world’s longest postwar boom has accepted any culpability for the crisis that has engulfed the global banking system.

…

“I made a mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organisations, specifically banks and others, were such that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity in the firms,” said Greenspan.

They have learned nothing at all.

Who To Listen To

Paul Krugman, The New York Times

July 30, 2012, 9:03 am

One thing that’s striking in Portes’s discussion – and something I very much agree with – is the irrelevance of formal credentials. As we’ve debated how to deal with the worst slump since the 1930s, a distressing number of economists have taken to arguing on the basis that they have fancy degrees and you don’t – or in some cases that well, you may have a fancy degree too, and even a prize or two, but in the wrong sub-field, so there.

But all this counts for very little, especially when macroeconomics itself – or at any rate the kind of macroeconomics that has dominated the journals these past couple of decades – is very much on trial.

I’ve always wanted to use that title.

Maybe I can get Samuel L. Jackson to play the Pope.

5 x Five – Colbert Report on Unions – Doctors and Nurses (03:10)