LargeTomato

They may be skipping small portions of the post-print qual. Or more likely, they're just more confident that the pieces being created are of a certain level of quality. It's a hype-y statement but they're probably trying to highlight that they're doing some sort of software-defined quals.

I don't think you're reasoning is actually sound here.

Nasa doesn't have the capability today, but that does not mean that the capabilities that they are building for tomorrow are "batshit Insanity". This is a very silly take.

We are going to The moon for two reasons. First, we want to set up a more permanent base. Nasa refers to this as "we're here to stay"

The second reason we are going to the moon so that we can put the first person of color and the first woman on the moon. That is explicitly an Artemis mission purpose.

Only time will tell if either of these two missions were actually worth it.

One more point

Early on, SLS designers made the catastrophic decision to reuse Shuttle hardware, which is like using Fabergé eggs to save money on an omelette.

SLS designers did not make the decision to use shuttle hardware per se. SLS was explicitly designed and funded to use that hardware. One of the original purposes of Artemis, before the other two purposes that we see in the media were even decided upon, was to make use of shuttle hardware.

The idea of stealth is tested every day. When missions are planned the capability of the aircraft determines what missions is can fly. A stealth aircraft can factually fly closer to an enemy's AA system without being detected.

We want to make sure people believe in the deterrent. If people start to think they could take out all of our nukes somehow that would be dangerous.

"Root for" someone means to cheer for someone or look forward to someone's success. You root for sports teams, your kid to do well on their test, or for your candidate to win an election.

Barrack in British English can mean to jeer or boo someone. That's the opposite of root. I've never heard the word barrack used like this in America.

It kind of seems like you are being unscientific and politically motivated.

I believe you are correct. Relativity is now only printing engines, just like SpaceX, Rocket Lab, Astra, Firefly, Stoke, and others. They are no longer a company driving forward 3D printing technology and that's too bad.

Consequences for my own inaction play an incredibly important motivational role for me. I don't get motivated by sunshine and rainbows, I personally get motivated by consequences.

So it's great that we can provide people 6 doses of narcan and act like they're big strong adults who are down on their luck, but it's incredibly harmful to pretend that this is the only possible solution to motivating behavior.

It's not very far fetched to detonate a nuke in space. The Russians can already do this without developing a brand new weapons platform.

The idea has been around a long time. This was the plot of CoD MW2 If someone nuked above the US and knocked out our grid it would be the most cost effective attack you can possibly think of.

I can think of a few extremely good reasons to go "Deathcon 3" against military satellites. For example, if the enemy derives more benefits from space than you do.

Unfortunately your son is uncommon and for every kid who "counts in binary" there are dozens of kids in Juvenile Hall, on food stamps, no job, government handouts, sub-100 IQs. Your son may generate untold wealth and a portion of that will go to feeding the masses.

White Aspiring! That's a new one. I'll go tell my wife her parents didn't move here to flee communism. They actually fled to this country so they could be white!

If the market determined the price of parking then people would flip out because parking was only affordable to the middle class and it would instantly be framed as an anti-poor thing.

It is a shame we're seeing a divestment in 3D printing technologies. Relativity Space recently descoped their entire 3D printing department, but I believe they still may be using some commercially-acquired printers.

I hope we can see someone else take up the mantle on complex 3D printing manufacturing. There's an Indian space company that is trying to do what Relativity did. I hope it works out for them.

Yes, but it's well known that Israel gets away with it because US backing. Just take a look at the UN resolutions for a cease fire.

The most precise definition of money laundering may be that. But in general, laundering anything means to pass it off as something it may not be, particularly in a dishonest way.

But good on you for really getting your definitions down I'm sure you're super fascinating at parties.

If your argument reduces to "money isn't real, it just stands for something real" then I'm just not sure you and I are going to have a constructive discussion.

"Money laundering" as in the flow of cash and assets is obfuscated to appear as something it is not.

I don't know of any technology that can respond to the injury of its passengers by sending them to the hospital. That doesn't mean it can't happen, it just isn't a reality yet. I hope it gets there and most importantly I believe it can get there.

If it fails 10% or the time that sounds like a great start and I hope they can improve it! 10% failure rate seems like a great process that could be improved.

Again, I'm interested in why capitalism makes you pessimistic about technological advancement. Capitalism seems pretty good at advancing technology. Let me ask you a question, why do you think "capitalism" can get such a system to 10% failure and then stop improving forever? That seems pretty random to me. I'm interested in why you think that!

Also, why do you think it's a zero sum game? E.g. we can cure cancer and make self driving cars better at the same time! It's pretty sweet actually.

You know what driverless cars can't do? Redirect a passenger to the emergency room due to acute problems that occur in the car.

You state this as a fact with absolute confidence. That's interesting. Not only do I respectfully disagree, but I'm actually surprised you are so sure of yourself. It seems (to me) rather obvious that self driving cars are not a mature technology yet. In fact, they aren't even deployed widely. In that regard, of course it isn't a mature technology!

So I'd really appreciate it if you could help me understand how you arrived at that conclusion. Being so incredibly confident you must have a rock solid set of arguments about this topic and I'd love to hear them.

It is not because the entity issuing the dollar (America) grows and produces stuff. Ponzi schemes are money laundering schemes. These are entirely different.

A good portion of it just to fuck around in foreign countries against my wishes. How much more should they take?

Well, if we defunded the military 100% and let the world order go to shit and that's exactly how you want it then we'd still need to raise taxes to cover our deficit.

So go ahead and vilify the military all you want, it's your right. But at least be aware that getting rid of the military is not going to solve the issue.

I.e. the same way commerce was carried out everywhere for approximately forever.

No! That's not true :) as long as there has been debt there has been fiat. There has been debt since the beginning of commerce. So your system is going to have the same issues. You're "assuming" quite a lot for someone who really shouldn't be assuming anything.

I'm interested in understanding why you think autism is sociopolitical and not knowable through science. You state this many times as fact.

The term "autism" may be an umbrella term that defines multiple conditions. I don't know that to be true but it might be. If that is the case, then it seems likely because we simply don't understand autism well enough to categorize it further, not because autism is unknowable from a scientific or medical perspective. It may be an umbrella term today but so many concepts in science start out as flawed and are refined over time as we build our understanding.

Which gold standard? There are many.

Is everything backed by gold? So no loans, debt, or bonds? This is deflationary because the total value of stuff grows but the monetary base stays the same.

Is there a fiat currency backed by gold? How will you avoid the monetary base growing larger than the total quantity of gold in the world? How is this functionally different from today?

Our taxes cover entitlements, military, and debt. That's it. Everything else is coming from the deficit. The Republicans have cut taxes to an unsustainable level. No matter how big or small the rest of the government is, the tax base is too low to support it.

I'm not sure why you're continuing down your argumentative line. Do you really not see the forest through the trees? You have even rebuttalled against the other person, you just keep saying "nuh uh what about X"

We have urgent problems and theoretical, future problems. CO2 levels are an urgent problem. NE can help here. Nuclear waste is not an urgent problem today and likely will never be as urgent as climate change.

If you squint really hard Wood is a carbon fiber composite.

Sort of.