 I think is a good thing. But these features aren't all that useful by themselves, and they don't have all that much to do with the part being, you know, a science lab. -I don't want to sound like I'm opposed to using the lab to get science points. I very much want to have a science lab up in space, doing science stuff. That just seems like one of the things you should be doing in a space simulator, and it's one of the main reasons to have a space station or surface base. The game should reward you for doing this, by providing some (reasonable) output of science or other resources. Moreover, I want my scientist Kerbals to have a function (resetting experiments is fine, but again, not enough by itself). And I want leveling up your scientists to help you in some meaningful way. All that said, what would be a good method to fix the MPL into something that's balanced, still useful, and more fun/intuitive to use? Frankly, I don't claim to have a complete answer. But here are some suggestions, some or all of which might be involved in a given fix. -Scrap the current "MPL eats experiments, generates a new resource called data, eats the data and then poops out massive science points" mechanic. It's bad. Just bad. But at least, cut the output back to something more reasonable, and remove the repeatability in different labs. -Use the lab as a means to get most or all the "recover" value of experiments without having to send them back to Kerbin manually (I think the lab did something like this in the early versions?). Maybe scale the recovery value to the experience level of the scientists operating it. This goes with the idea that the MPL is not "better" at science than the folks back home; it's just more convenient. To make this function meaningful, they might have to decrease radio transmission values relative to fully recovered values. That is fine by me, again especially for goo and the other physical data samples. -Perhaps provide a small science bonus for analyzing the physical samples in the SOI or biome in which they were found. -Offer contracts to go out and get a particular sample from a particular biome, and take it back to an MPL for testing. This makes a lot of sense - suppose the Kerbin State University just got a grant to test the soil for the Mun's East Crater for the presence of isoexplodium or something, and they want you to help out. These contracts could reward you with both cash and fairly significant amounts of science. -When "launch a space station" contracts require a science lab, require it to be manned by scientists. This would be a more significant issue for stations outside Kerbin's SOI. -It's probably fine to leave the other auxiliary functions of the MPL as is. They're just not that big of a deal. It might make more sense to limit the level-up function to scientists, but on the other hand it might be odd if there were no comparable level-up methods for the other classes. I still feel like there's something missing, though. I would like to have a reason to put my Kerbals up there and have them sit around sciencing, like on the ISS. And none of my suggestions get to that all that well. But maybe that's just an inherent problem when time is basically unlimited unless you're using a life support mod of whatnot. Sorry for the lengthy rant. Feel free to add any other ideas for rehabilitating this poor misunderstood part!
After taking a break from KSP around this time last year, I'm back enjoying all the KSP goodness. But has the way the science lab handles experiments changed whilst I way away? I used to be able to copy across the data gathered from my landing missions across to the science lab and still return that same data to Kerbin for the Science Points. I've just built myself a new Mun orbital lab, then landed in a new Munar biome and conducted a set of experiments. When I returned to the lab and clicked on the "flask" icon, so the scientists could get on with some research, the data seems to have vanished. Is it still possible to use the lab as before, or is data now consumed when transfered across? In other words, do I need to conduct two missions, one to add data to the lab and another to return data to Kerbin? Apologies if this has been asked before. I did a forum search, bit couldn't find anything relevant.
I've placed my first space station in orbit on my new 1.1 career. I have a science lab crunching away at some data and I noticed that apparently in 1.1 once you put an experiment in the lab you don't get it back to be recovered or transmitted. My question is, once the lab finishes processing the data from these experiments, should I transmit it or recover the lab? What made me doubtful about this is the following note in the changelog: "Labs with science can now be recovered for science." So will i get the typical penalty if I transmit the generated science instead of recovering it, or does this just refer to recovering experiments that weren't processed? Thanks in advance.
Is There A way to add a Science Lab to the probe - rover -base thingy? Like with a "0" crew requirement? I made a curiosty rover replica and i would like to have a science lab onboard like the real thing.
For the last few (in-game) years, i've been focused on completing my main goals before 1.1 arrives. This means that i haven't collected Science points from my bases for a long time. When i finally did so yesterday, this happened: "-923 Science added". Is that a bug or a result of leaving a full lab untouched for too long? I'm using the "Science points for funds" strategy, but i always receive a few science points (usually 5 to 15) and lots of funds. I've checked two bases on the Duna system and one on the Mun. They all have the same problem: the first two had 500 Science points but the output was widely different. The last one, on the Mun, had a bit less than 100 Science points. So, is this a bug or a consequence of not caring about a lab for too long?&gt;&gt; It’s their choice to isolate themselves. 

 So they choose to defend themselves from outsiders in fear of being conquered, so they are deserving of hell? They too are aware of the horrors of colonialism since they will protect their island at all cost. That's not a choice no more than is it a way of survival. And what about the children who will become the next generation? Their parents may have had rejected contact, but the next generation will probably not be aware of any outsiders since none will ever come back from the outside world to make contact again. It's now illegal to go to that island now. Is every generation on that island doomed to hell? Did they get to choose to reject contact? 

&gt;&gt; And they likely wouldn’t accept the truth anyways

Wouldn't that be because God made that so? He is all knowing and powerful. He created these people and their island. He has created them to be isolated. He knows they will reject them correct? I think it's pretty cool that all weapons kinda have their place but I don't necessarily know if that makes the game more competitive. I think putting everyone on the same playing field at all times and not having every gun be a little overpowered is BETTER because it makes camping less important and what's more important is team decision and personal awareness and teamwork. It would take me forever to explain this and I'm sure it can work both ways but I don't know if autos and having other guns on the map so easily picked up works better because of the sheer ability to snowball.
Twitch.tv is where everything competitive goes down! Besides that head over to the teambeyond.net forums that's where the rest of the competitive discussion goes down!Our perception is that the public debate is plagued by bitterness, anger and recrimination; people no longer seem to disagree pleasantly, so instead of listening to the pros and cons of an issue, there are laughing emojis or sarcastic criticisms of the genuine opinions of others.
In a week which saw the appalling murder of England MP David Amess, threats against our own MPs and reports of up to ten journalists targeted with sinister messages, the spotlight has been on companies social media.
As always, they are the big bad wolf.
In the United States, Frances Haugen worked for Facebook but copied thousands of internal documents before leaving, and as a whistleblower, she says Facebook products harm children, fuel division and weaken democracy. She says, for example, that in a Facebook poll, 32% of teenage girls who felt bad about themselves said Instagram made them feel worse.
But Facebook hid it from us.
Facebook, of course, fought back; but it all seems a far cry from the original idea Mark Zuckerberg and his classmates had (less than 20 years ago) of connecting people in a positive social network to share news and entertainment.
Indeed, if you are one of the two billion monthly users worldwide, the plethora of family photos, bible verses, motivational texts, music videos and the rest can help make the world a better place.
But, as always, once the darker elements of humanity see an opportunity for the more seedy side of life, they seize it.
It hasn’t been a good week for Twitter either. During a debate in the House of Lords, Baroness Fox, former MEP Claire Fox warned their Lordships that public figures