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!

China's Jade Rabbit Fights To Come Back From the Dead

timothy posted about 6 months ago | from the how-many-lives-do-rabbits-have? dept.

Moon 76

Despite being declared officially lost, the Chinese moon rover may yet have some life left. Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "CNN reports that reports of Jade Rabbit's demise may have been premature as signs are emerging that China's first lunar rover may be up and running again. Following technical malfunctions Xinhua says that the lunar rover had lost communication with mission control but on Thursday the state news agency said that the rover was "fully awake" and had returned to its normal signal-receiving status. "Jade Rabbit has fully resurrected and is able to receive signals, but still suffers a mechanical control abnormality," says China's lunar program spokesman Pei Zhaoyu. "The rover entered hibernation while in an abnormal state. We were worried it wouldn't be able to make it through the extreme cold of the lunar night. But it came back alive. The rover stands a chance of being saved as it is still alive." The lunar rover's end seemed near when it signed off at the end of January with a poignant message: "Goodnight humanity." Yutu, as the device is known in Mandarin, had been out of action for two weeks following a technical malfunction, and media around the world filed its obituary late on Wednesday after a short statement on Chinese state media alerted the world to its apparent terminal failings. Should Jade Rabbit make a full recovery, it would cap another success for space exploration, which has seen NASA's Opportunity Mars rover, currently exploring the red planet, far outlast its expected lifespan."

cancel ×

76 comments

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

It took Chinese New Years off (4, Funny)

david.emery (127135) | about 6 months ago | (#46237409)

and was recovering from all the partying and travel back to the Moon.

(Seriously, great news!)

Re:It took Chinese New Years off (3, Interesting)

jones_supa (887896) | about 6 months ago | (#46237603)

Seriously, great news!

My congratulations too. Great to hear that they can continue the project.

Re:It took Chinese New Years off (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46238593)

Or just that the sun is heating it up enough to revive from the cold. Not sure how many cold/warm cycles it would be able to survive in the crippled state.
Hope they learn something from it.

Not like everyone else that commented badly here have their first rev hardware/software of any level of real complexities works perfectly in real life. May the person with no sins cast the first stone.

Re: It took Chinese New Years off (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46238947)

I have the same concern, since it didn't wake up later than the schedule.

Re:It took Chinese New Years off (1)

LifesABeach (234436) | about 6 months ago | (#46241071)

Jade Rabbit doesn't have time to talk to it's "helicopter" parents? Typical youth.

Serves them right (-1, Troll)

rudy_wayne (414635) | about 6 months ago | (#46237417)

Serves them right for using crappy Chinese made components.

Re:Serves them right (2)

thunderclap (972782) | about 6 months ago | (#46237459)

Opposed to components made where? We don't any more. South eastern asia's slave labor camps? Seriously, it would have been smarter you just curse beta at this point.

Re: Serves them right (3, Informative)

O('_')O_Bush (1162487) | about 6 months ago | (#46237531)

Countries with engineering expertise, like Germany, any of the Norse countries, Japan, Taiwan, I could go on...

Thing about China is that their primary focus (permeates all of their culture) is to maintain high appearances even if everything underneath is complete crap. A good anecdote and analogy for this are their prize schools, which from the outside look like something you'd find in Abu Dhabi, but inside are literally falling apart and are a safety hazard to students.

With that in mind, if the Chinese are saying it is 'awake' with control abnormalities, I'd guess in reality it is about 5x worse than they claim.

Re: Serves them right (4, Informative)

Sockatume (732728) | about 6 months ago | (#46238419)

China's still saying it's dead; it's amateur radio enthusiasts who have detected its broadcast.

Re: Serves them right (3, Interesting)

Sockatume (732728) | about 6 months ago | (#46238431)

To be exact, they're saying it's in exactly the same malfunctioning state it was before the lunar winter.

Re: Serves them right (3, Informative)

thegarbz (1787294) | about 6 months ago | (#46241643)

Thing about China is that their primary focus (permeates all of their culture) is to maintain high appearances even if everything underneath is complete crap.

Actually China is happy to manufacture whatever the market wants. Do you want cheap and dangerous electronics which spew RFI and may burst into flames? You got it. Do you want excellent optical components for high-end telescopes? You got that too!

The only question is what level of quality control and oversight you're willing to pay for. I've had circuit boards manufactured in china which almost fell apart when I got them. Holes weren't centred, silkscreen was patchy, and the solder mask was a mess. I've also had an 8 layer board manufactured complete with gold plating and custom materials for the RF path which came out perfect, it also cost 100x the price of the cheap one.

You can get cheap plastic computers from China that may or may not boot up. Or you can get Apple Macs made in China.

What are you willing to pay for?

Re: Serves them right (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46245297)

Because Apple MAC's are designed in silicon valley where standards are superior to anything the CPC (Communist Party of China) can muster..

Re: Serves them right (1)

painandgreed (692585) | about 6 months ago | (#46246959)

Actually China is happy to manufacture whatever the market wants.

Yep, I'm sure we had companies wanting poisonous baby formula, lead paint, and dog food imported. Markets don't get what they want and are willing to pay for from China, they seem to get whatever China can get away with passing off.

Re: Serves them right (1)

thegarbz (1787294) | about 6 months ago | (#46251709)

Yep, I'm sure we had companies wanting poisonous baby formula, lead paint, and dog food imported. Markets don't get what they want and are willing to pay for from China, they seem to get whatever China can get away with passing off.

That's nothing to do with China and everything to do with quality control. If you go to China and say I want a widget and make sure it's red, they don't know you have something against lead paint. If you go to China and say I want a widget and make it red, and make it meet the Australian standards ASxxxx and ASxxxx, and meet the following toxicity requirements, then you will get a different product and charged accordingly.

Or are you suggesting if I come to you to buy a "piece of metal" I automatically get something made of solid gold? Hell no, you'd sell me the cheapest rustiest steel you could get away with. That's the whole reason specification documents are as long as they are. People don't know the rules of other countries, they sell only what you ask them too. Heck Vegimite, the staple died of Australian children was banned from the USA in 2006 because it didn't meet the FDA regulations on foliate. No one saw that coming because it's par-for-the-course here. Many countries have banned the use of MDF which is still heavily used in building in Australia. In South Africa you can buy asbestos fibre sheeting at the hardware store. (Note don't ever order a pre-fabed house from South Africa without specifying no Asbestos in your spec sheet).

You need to specify EVERYTHING. When we order valves from China we specify exact materials (yeah of course) but also specify that all valves will be subject to an independent 3rd party Positive Material Identification check and x-rayed for quality control prior to payment. It's all about trust and China with all it's reputation simply needs some quality control checks to keep them in line.

Re: Serves them right (1)

Eunuchswear (210685) | about 6 months ago | (#46251047)

Thing about China is that their primary focus (permeates all of their culture) is to maintain high appearances even if everything underneath is complete crap.

Hence the iphone.

Re:Serves them right (4, Funny)

quenda (644621) | about 6 months ago | (#46237473)

The China National Space Administration has already announced they will no longer be sourcing components via Alibaba or eBay.

Re:Serves them right (4, Insightful)

jones_supa (887896) | about 6 months ago | (#46237569)

Chinese have the skill to make both cheap crap and premium components. It's really only about the targeted price point and what the customer orders.

Re:Serves them right (3, Informative)

0123456 (636235) | about 6 months ago | (#46237609)

Chinese have the skill to make both cheap crap and premium components. It's really only about the targeted price point and what the customer orders.

Except when the customer orders premium components, they produce a few to prove they can do it, then deliver cheap crap.

Apparently Aston-Martin are having to recall most of their recent cars because they ordered premium components from China and... didn't get them.

Re:Serves them right (1)

thegarbz (1787294) | about 6 months ago | (#46241649)

So you got one case. Now explain high end telescope optics, high end computer products, and the many other auto components which have no problem which also come from China.

I think you've been watching too much Batman.

Re:Serves them right (1)

Eunuchswear (210685) | about 6 months ago | (#46251105)

Have you ever worked in manufacturing?

Back in the early 80's I visited the "inward goods" department of Plessey Telecoms Edge Lane plant (building then "state of the art(*)" electonic telephone exchanges).

Random samples of every incoming batch of components were tested. fairly regularly whole batches were rejected. the suppliers were in Germany, Italy, the USA, Japan...

As the great Ronald said: Trust but verify.

These days people would rather just lawyer up.

((*) ok, not as good as the Ericsson AXE exchanges, but national pride...)

Re:Serves them right (2)

cusco (717999) | about 6 months ago | (#46237661)

It's really sad that consumers here have been convinced by retailers that price is everything, Much of the rest of the world still remembers that it is often worth more over the long run to pay more for a better product, but here a blender that is two bucks cheaper will far outsell the more solidly-built one next to it on the shelf.

Re:Serves them right (2)

mcgrew (92797) | about 6 months ago | (#46239285)

I see the opposite, that people think "free" means "worthless". I see people paying ten bucks for a cup of coffee because it's Starbucks. I see people buying bottled water. I see people paying two dollars for a can of corn when there are store brands of corn grown in the same field and canned in the same factory for sixty nine cents. I see people buying Tylenol and Alieve when the generics are chemically identical and a third the price.

Really, I can make a call or a text or an email or take a picture or video or do anything else on my $125 Android that you can do with an iPod, and mine's waterproof and doesn't have delicate glass like the iPhone.

My sister, who is fairly well off, bought a Lexus. My old Chrysler has more comfortable seats, better HVAC (kicks in faster), a better sounding radio, but when it was new (I bought it used) it cost half of what that Lexus cost.

A more expensive item is not always better, nor is it always better suited for your purposes.

Re:Serves them right (1)

retchdog (1319261) | about 6 months ago | (#46240501)

What is this magical phone without delicate glass on the touchscreen? I want one.

Re:Serves them right (1)

mcgrew (92797) | about 6 months ago | (#46248049)

Apparently almost anything except an iPhone. I've only broken a single screen, and that was a cheap throwaway phone I slipped in the ice and fell on. But my daughter's an iPhone user and breaks all of them. I've seen other iPhones with cracked screens, but no other brands..

I suspect Apple uses thinner glass to make the whole phone thinner. I know of no other phone so delicate.

Re:Serves them right (1)

Eunuchswear (210685) | about 6 months ago | (#46251121)

N900.

It's delicate plastic, not delicate glass.

Maybe not the answer you were hoping for.

Re:Serves them right (1)

mjwx (966435) | about 6 months ago | (#46243135)

I agree with you up until this point.

My sister, who is fairly well off, bought a Lexus. My old Chrysler has more comfortable seats, better HVAC (kicks in faster), a better sounding radio, but when it was new (I bought it used) it cost half of what that Lexus cost.

I agree that a Lexus is an overpriced Toyota... But it's still a Toyota and Toyota air-conditioners are built with two settings, off and Igloo.

Re:Serves them right (1)

mcgrew (92797) | about 6 months ago | (#46247905)

Yet another reason for me to like mine better. Dial in the temperature you want and that's the temperature you get, summer or winter. In the summer mine starts kicking out cold air quickly (takes a minute to cool the pipes).

Re:Serves them right (1)

cusco (717999) | about 6 months ago | (#46248065)

The Toyota (aka Lexus) was designed to last for half a million miles or more. The Chrysler was designed to fall apart after a hundred thousand. Literally. My great uncle retired from the Chrysler Proving Grounds, one of their jobs was to visit wrecking yards, find Chrysler products with >100,000 miles, and examine all the parts. If (for example) the starter and steering linkage were still in fine shape while everything else was uniformly worn management would go after the manufacturers of those parts and squeeze them on price until the quality dropped.

Re:Serves them right (1)

mcgrew (92797) | about 5 months ago | (#46254063)

Odd, mine has 160,000 miles and I've used it hard. All I've had to replace were some steering parts when I had it aligned last year (besides tires, oil, wiper refills, etc). I guess I got lucky.

Either way, it's foolish to pay a premium for an item to last twenty years when you're going to trade it in in three.

Re:Serves them right (2)

Tanktalus (794810) | about 6 months ago | (#46239513)

Price is a lot.

First, you have to amortise the cost of the item over its lifespan. That blender that is two bucks cheaper may last just as long as the solidly-built one, especially if I only have light-duty uses for a blender. Or the TV I bought a week ago for $200 has a planned lifespan of no more than about 5 years by which time I hope to have a plan for a better, complete entertainment system - so there's no point in buying a $500 TV that's going to get replaced in 5 years anyway. Or the car that costs $20k and lasts 5 years is still a better deal than the car that costs $50k and lasts 10 years.

Second, you have to look at opportunity costs. Even comparing a $20k vehicle that needs replacing after 4 years (a real stinker) and comparing to a $50k car that needs replacing after 10 (a bit of a stinker, but these numbers provide nice, round numbers), the $20k vehicle is still a better deal - I only need to come up with $20k now, if I need a loan, I only pay interest on whatever I can't pay outright on $20k, not the extra $30k, and the rest of the money can be used for other purposes for 4 years, perhaps in a GIC or other investments, or paying off other loans (credit cards, mortgage, etc.).

And, finally, you have to look at money available. If I need a blender, don't need anything fancy, and don't really have anything budgeted for it, the cheaper one fits that budget better. Maybe it's better to have the blender than not, but I don't have money for it. Blenders may make less of an issue here, but often vehicles and food fit here better - this becomes one of my issues with organic foods - by driving up the cost of good, nutritious whole foods, you force a bunch of people who are struggling financially (i.e., the poor) to buy less nutritionally beneficial processed foods because they can no longer afford wholesome foods. Yes, it's better, but if you don't have the money, you just don't have the money.

Re:Serves them right (1)

mspohr (589790) | about 6 months ago | (#46239545)

The problem is that it is very difficult for the average consumer (or even techie) to tell when something is high quality and hence worth more. I have found that most of the time, the cheap stuff is adequate. If I want quality, I have to spend a lot of time researching. Sometimes you can trust brands to produce quality stuff and to stand behind it if it breaks. Other times, not so much, and the task is complicated by counterfeits.
A recent example... I wanted to buy a few standard 18650 lithium rechargeable batteries for a project. Going through Amazon, the prices ranged from $3 to $10 each. There were various brands Sony, Panasonic, Samsung which I know and trust and I also came across a brand called UltraFire which may be good but seems to suffer from a lot of counterfeiting. I ended up buying the most expensive Sony for $10 since they were the only brand with uniformly good reviews. All of the others seemed to have a number of duds and I didn't want to hassle with failures and returns.

Re:Serves them right (1)

geekoid (135745) | about 6 months ago | (#46240069)

Except it's not usually 2 bucks. It's usually something like 19.99 or 349.99

Obligatory (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46237467)

I for one , welcome, Our Lunar Robotic Zombie Overlord!

Re:Obligatory (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46238135)

Hrumph. Kids today. This subject calls for a Monty Python "I feel better...I think I'll go for a walk..." joke. The overlord style joke was more appropriate when it landed.

Re:Obligatory (1)

tomhath (637240) | about 6 months ago | (#46238705)

It wasn't dead, it was just pining for the Ganges

I think you meant Yang Tze. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46239071)

Nice try though.

Re:I think you meant Yang Tze. (1)

tomhath (637240) | about 6 months ago | (#46247715)

Yea. But I really want to be a lumberjack anyway.

That's what they want you to believe (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46237481)

In reality, China already has a 3D printer on the Moon and they simply printed out another Jade Rabbit.

Re:That's what they want you to believe (0)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | about 6 months ago | (#46237543)

More likely a party official gifted the lunar lander to his 10yo son for his birthday and has now been disciplined.

Less than a day after the original story was submitted to slashdot, the craft is returned to the fake landing site in the desert.

Too bad they didn't launch it this year... (0)

ackthpt (218170) | about 6 months ago | (#46237483)

Then we could go on about whipping a Dead Horse.

Can we please stop anthropomorphising rovers? (4, Funny)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 6 months ago | (#46237635)

it signed off at the end of January with a poignant message: "Goodnight humanity."

No it didn't. Some guy in a press office wrote it.

Can we please stop anthropomorphising rovers? They hate that.

Re:Can we please stop anthropomorphising rovers? (1)

bobbied (2522392) | about 6 months ago | (#46238209)

HAL agrees, according to Seri. Haven't heard from Spirit Rover yet...

Re:Can we please stop anthropomorphising rovers? (1)

TangoMargarine (1617195) | about 6 months ago | (#46239519)

Except for the part where the rover is actually programmed to emit messages like that...granted, it seems a bit dopey and a waste of man-hours to me, but hey.

http://science.slashdot.org/st... [slashdot.org]

Amen (XKCD) (3, Interesting)

ThatsNotPudding (1045640) | about 6 months ago | (#46239617)

Because this was fucking heartbreaking: https://xkcd.com/695/ [xkcd.com]

Am I the only one? (1)

starless (60879) | about 6 months ago | (#46237665)

Who thinks that "Jade Rabbit" sounds like it should be the name of a sex toy?

Re:Am I the only one? (3, Informative)

Thanshin (1188877) | about 6 months ago | (#46237785)

It actually is. As noted by John Stewart in his humorous relay of the previous "death of the lunar sex toy" news.

fago8z (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46237893)

= 36400 F8eeBSD not going home

moon poachers (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 6 months ago | (#46237983)

Clearly it was the work of Chinese moon poachers. Jade rabbits can be make into slippers that give you vitality and speed so they go for $1 mil on the black market. There were definitely poachers on the moon waiting for it.

Cover up the embarrassment (3, Insightful)

wiredlogic (135348) | about 6 months ago | (#46238161)

This sounds more like a phony story ordered by Party elites to cover up the embarrassment of failure. They can just pretend it started working again (with the camera mysteriously failing) and save face with bogus tweets and press releases.

Re:Cover up the embarrassment (1)

Sepodati (746220) | about 6 months ago | (#46238239)

Sadly, this is the first thing I thought, too. I hope that it is working again, though.

Re:Cover up the embarrassment (1)

ThatsDrDangerToYou (3480047) | about 6 months ago | (#46238793)

Sadly, this is the first thing I thought, too. I hope that it is working again, though.

It's not out of the question that it could wake up. If they still have power and the boards are reasonably intact a timed reboot should be achievable. Having functional devices--sensors, actuators, communications, or whatever they have, would be more of a challenge. Or yeah, a fake story is always a possibility.. I'm sure they would have some of their best engineers on the team, so I wouldn't count them out yet, or so I would like to believe.

Re:Cover up the embarrassment (2)

confused one (671304) | about 6 months ago | (#46239197)

Or... it could just be that the electronics and battery finally warmed up enough to start working. It does get to around -175C during the Lunar night and the failure was the inability to close the "cover" over the electronics bay, protecting it.

Re: Cover up the embarrassment (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46240959)

Really???
So can you explain why they said it was dead in the first place?
Some people just can't live without their little conspiracies...

Re:Cover up the embarrassment (1)

thegarbz (1787294) | about 6 months ago | (#46241673)

If you made a phony story would you publish a tweet showing a picture of the RF being received including the exact frequencies it's happening on so any ham could independently verify the findings?

It may be bogus, but common this isn't North Korea we're talking about. The Chinese government is a bit smarter than that.

It was only mostly dead (4, Funny)

DieByWire (744043) | about 6 months ago | (#46238181)

Mostly dead is a little bit alive. A little bit alive they can work with.

Re:It was only mostly dead (1)

ignavus (213578) | about 6 months ago | (#46242931)

Mostly dead is a little bit alive. A little bit alive they can work with.

But does it have a wheelbarrow? That would be something.

An ahem..Schrodingers rover (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46245515)

one might say.

Not quite dead yet (3, Funny)

John3 (85454) | about 6 months ago | (#46238195)

Mission Control: "Brave, brave Jade Rabbit! You shall not have died in vain!"
Jade Rabbit: "Uh, I'm-I'm not quite dead, sir."
Mission Control: "Well, you shall not have been mortally wounded in vain!"
Jade Rabbit: "Uh, I-I think uh, I could pull through, sir."
Mission Control: "Oh, I see."

Re:Not quite dead yet (1)

ericloewe (2129490) | about 6 months ago | (#46238511)

Bravo.

A trojan rabbit joke would also have been appropriate.

Not so much lost (2)

dkf (304284) | about 6 months ago | (#46238273)

Just needed a fsck and it was then in /lost+found

Re:Not so much lost (1)

bobbied (2522392) | about 6 months ago | (#46239927)

Just needed a fsck and it was then in /lost+found

That would be great except this is Windows 98 and somebody sent the format C:/ command....Anybody have a boot disk and a long arm?

PEY project (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46238553)

well, it looks as we were able to have dialog with the locals. teacher will be proud.

Zombie Chinese Robots on the Moon (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46238599)

Zombie Chinese Robots on the Moon . . . if only Laurel and Hardy were still alive, casting would be a cinch.

This is why China will dominate the world (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46238845)

Apollo 11 landing? Meh.
Luna 2 landing? Meh.
Zombie Jade Rabbit landing? AWESOME!

Better headline... (1)

CCarrot (1562079) | about 6 months ago | (#46239185)

"Zombie Rabbit On The Moon!" :p

rover life span (1)

John_3000 (166166) | about 6 months ago | (#46239643)

I am tired of reading about how the Mars rovers miraculously lived so long.

It should be obvious to even the dumbest among us that the short "expected lifespan" of the rovers was just some contractual trigger for some bonus for some contractor and was in no way a design goal.

Re:rover life span (1)

geekoid (135745) | about 6 months ago | (#46240009)

Incorrect. It must just pain you when things go well simply do to good design.

Even if you were correct, you are not, it would Still Be a Design Goal to get there.

Re:rover life span (2)

bobbied (2522392) | about 6 months ago | (#46240079)

I am tired of reading about how the Mars rovers miraculously lived so long.

It should be obvious to even the dumbest among us that the short "expected lifespan" of the rovers was just some contractual trigger for some bonus for some contractor and was in no way a design goal.

You are right, it was a design criteria, a requirement etc. 90 days was the warranty period, the contracted minimum lifespan required for the rovers and the absolute minimum design criteria for the entire system. It simply MUST work 100% for 90 days. I'm sure the "goal" was much longer. I'm just guessing, but had either of the rovers failed within the 90 days a sizable final payment would not have been made.

But, I'm not so tired of hearing that the rovers both have lasted more than the warranty. It is a credit to the engineers who designed, built and operate these systems that they actually lasted (and continue to last) for so much longer than the minimums. These little marvels serve as an example of how a successful mission is executed and what JPL and NASA can do, even on short budgets and timelines. Although the science being done by the remaining one is limited, I don't get tired of seeing new stories about them and their remarkable story and endurance.

This news was conveniently ommited by western medi (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46239957)

But luckilly at least one central european news outlet did report tech-news that JADE RABBIT is still operational, but so far not responding. Propably low batteries charge was to blame in order to power up off-the-shelf technologies used in this little piece of space-travel marvel. KUDOS to Chinese technicians, engineers and other scientists on board this project.

I don't know if the title is a very cleaver pun (1)

geekoid (135745) | about 6 months ago | (#46239999)

or the writer got lucky.

Bad analogy (1)

scdeimos (632778) | about 6 months ago | (#46240549)

Should Jade Rabbit make a full recovery, it would cap another success for space exploration, which has seen NASA's Opportunity Mars rover, currently exploring the red planet, far outlast its expected lifespan."

Opportunity far outlived its projected 90 day operational lifetime. Jade Rabbit was supposed to go 3 months and has already gone belly-up just a month into it.

Reminds me of the Voyager thing (1)

supermachoman (2479416) | about 6 months ago | (#46241541)

Is it in the heliopause, or past it? Is the cat alive or dead?

Death of Slashdot (1)

thegarbz (1787294) | about 6 months ago | (#46241605)

We all asked for it. We bitched and moaned. We wanted Slashdot to deliver stories faster, and we mocked it when it published yesterdays news.

The one time Slashdot listens to its users and it published a story so fast that it was wrong, and was debunked only hours later.

Good to see the little wabbit is still fighting on.

How funny (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46243323)

to read all the hateful comments about "Chinese junk" spouted by envious Americans, who now realize this rover is in fact superior Chinese quality, persisting through conditions it was not built to endure.

DO NOT (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46244895)

Click on the "The rover stands a chance of being saved as it is still alive" link, the "Translate" link performs a script injection attack.

Eeek (1)

sociocapitalist (2471722) | about 6 months ago | (#46246159)

It was probably on the dark side of the moon looking for Transformers...

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>