Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by MKI

  1. I keep track of what NASA does, but unlike a conglomerate of "startup space companies" all chasing SpaceX, NASA still does things pretty slow and steady. (Or in some cases horribly delayed) Looking forward to JWST actually getting off the pad (please dear god get off the pad!) as well
  2. Elon Musk moonlighting as real life Iron Man confirmed.
  3. I want to provide some accidental evidence I just ran into personally. For the last week of weather, my sunny So-Cal weather went from: - "cold" - yay fall is finally here - hot - er nevermind, lets turn on the AC. - desert weather rain storm- multiple Lightning strikes, crazy wind, heavy isolated rains - cold - again I'm not an old person, but the sorta weather I ran into is more of a desert environment I've seen in Arizona and Nevada. The multiple lightning strikes are totally new for this area in my memory. And the fact it took basically 1 day to go back to "its cold enough for a jacket" So-Cal weather isn't "normal" from my memory. Unfortunately, getting rain where I live doesn't really help the drought. With a few years we went from historical rainfall in the mountains, to historical drought.
  4. I know the idea of feeling pain to be pleasurable for some people, but most people don't really like pain. I can't see that being a highly requested feature. This is Second Life through and through, or any other similar sandbox-like game. Just without the AI aspect, which again I don't want to touch on much because it turns into a rabbit whole. You can't just "add AI" and have it magically be whatever you imagine AI to be. Even the modern day internet is made up of a bunch of actors doing things, and not all those actors are actually human. From your operating system managing its fan speed, to your router directing packets to the right servers, to the software running on this page to mange event handlers. All that software isn't "smart", or "AI", but they make up an incredible complex system. You can even boil down what you'd think of as "modern AI", like Alexa, or Siri is just a system built out of a bunch of data to match patterns. We call it AI, but its still crazy stupid. In general, such a virtual world can't be hyper realistic because if its too realistic... why play it?
  5. I think the topic of a "virtual world" and its impact on society, economically and social is a fun topic by itself. However now this thread is mixing in AI and bitcoin topics for some reason I think I'll just skip over those properties, since the original topic is interesting enough. There are some holes in the premise that need addressing. Like why would this game make murder feel like murder? I can't think of a single reason for such a feature, so having "crimes be like real crimes" doesn't make any sense either. Also no one would pay to play at that rate. You'd need to make it nearly free to get any sort of user-base. (hello second life) Without the "social world" aspect, its just a fancy video game and it would have minimal if not no impact on society as a whole. It's only if it's nearly or completely free, and highly accessible to a large group would such a technology actually take off and possibly affect society. Generally I think you end up with what is essentially the modern day internet, but more flashy. Ultimately however, such technologies would also follow the modern day internet in terms of problems. Anonymity can make people act completely different, positively and negatively. Stuff like "spending all your time in the pod" is already what many do, just its their phone, social media, video games. That's already "a thing", just without the pod itself. The changes to society wouldn't be much, only this technology would just change the way we currently do things to be even more evasive, but the end result is the same. People end up "plugged in".
  6. Making humans multi-planetary is one hell of a mission statement. However, building bases on the Moon, and having long-term stays there is a fantastic/amazing accomplishment in itself. Hell building infrastructure on the Moon using Starships high turnaround time could make the ISS look likes child's play. "Frickin cool" indeed
  7. IVA improvements, (like raster-prop-manager) to include external camera's is on my wish list. I give it a low chance of becoming a reality though, as it can be a mod, and doesn't add anything to the game outside of IVA mode. Unless of course there is a game mode where you can only fly from IVA mode, then it would be incredible cool.
  8. I agree, The fun little messages for science are fun at first, but get tedious very fast. I personally would like to see this sort of game play feature get turned more into the "milestones" sorta achievements. Where me bringing science parts to a place automatically gets me some science. Such actions could still display the fun little message, but it occurs in the background so I still get some rewards for doing the mission, but don't have to deal with the hassle of clicking a buncha menus. The exception to this would be Kerbal related ground experiments. I think having them play golf do science is inspiring and hilarious at the same time.
  9. I always used my head cannon reasoning. Jeb's arms have infinite stamina! There's a weird niche where the power used to apply control surfaces can't really come from anywhere but fixing that niche will result in either you lugging up a bunch of batteries for a glider, or forcing you to ignite engines to replenish your supplies. Suddenly your Shuttle replica is in a race against time to get to the ground before its batteries run out, or your just using battery cells and you end up with essentially the same craft, except with more parts you must have on your craft. I'd put this in the same bucket as SAS. Every craft has some form of SAS, because playing the game without it is just a huge pain. Sure adding it would make the game make more sense, and increase difficulty a bit. But the game is already pretty darn hard ;D
  10. I'm a big fan of the IVA experience, but I don't expect KSP2 to support more or less the same level of IVA support as the first game. I'd be happy with getting IVA's with more dials, switches, and interactive elements (like RPM) but walking around in my self-made Galactic Star Cruiser might be too much, especially in a game more about going places. I believe some parts will be procedural, others wont be, such as wings and fairings. I think KSP2 will allow Kerbals to more or less "fly themselves" to cut down on repetitive gameplay. This wont be Mech Jeb, but actual Jeb performing tasks as the actual pilot. I think there is a fine balance between the game doing everything for you, and the game helping you cut down on doing everything. I'm sure whatever "mechjeb-like" autopilot is added will find a solid balance between those two, since we are talking about the main gameplay ;D Its also worth keeping in mind, KSP 1 eventually got some useful mods integrated directly into the game. So its not like popular mods can't be integrated over time into the stock game.
  11. I finally got around to landing a lander on Duna, and setting up communications to support a manned mission. I've done this a number of times before, but still feels awesome! ;D
  12. If I was paranoid about "eyes from the sky", I wouldn't try to hide anything. I'd try to show more so they wont know what they are looking at. So for example, if I'm building a base/outpost, I'd spend my money building fake bases as decoys in multiple locations. Or even in my real bases add decoys to make it appear it has more troops than it really has. I'd also have fake "secret tech" in multiple places to further confuse the enemy. Finally I'd only make "teases" of all this fake tech, and still try to hide it. All this is probably cheaper and easier than trying to hide everything from surveillance, and completely ignores ground based old-fashion reconnaissance.
  13. The "catching" infrastructure is just as high risk as the SH itself, and technically the rest of the entire infrastructure itself. Starship is slightly lower risk, at least in terms of the parts already tested, such as belly flopping and landing. Due to that high risk, creating the actual "catching" infrastructure should be done now to remove as much risk, and give as much time for iteration later. Something as simple as fit checks, manufacturing techniques can be ironed out and iterated upon without trying to actually catch anything... yet. I'd put a catching attempt down the line to make sure the booster even gets off the pad in one piece. Getting it off the pad will certainly be a landmark achievement, and a sight to behold.
  14. I wonder what sorta funds NASA could provide to all the other private enterprise launch providers, most of which are currently in the "small sat" market. Rocket Lab and Relativity Space come to mind, but are way behind SpaceX in terms of actual stuff done. At a certain point SpaceX will turn into a monopoly if current trends continue.
  15. It has an excellent reason to exist, to line the pockets of those creating SLS.
  16. If the requirements are to examine the capsule from the outside, you only really need a small camera you can detach, then have the capsule do the "maneuvering". The camera's job would just need to be able to see and possibly rotate to keep orientation. However, the "seeing" part means you might need a pretty decent camera, which costs $, and still weighs something. If you can put a camera on a Telsa and launch it past the orbit of Mars as a demonstration, I'm sure you can do the same to get some neat shots of Dragon in orbit. But like anything weigh is still expensive, so you'd need a good reason to do it. There's already a camera in the trunk to observe stage separation, but as most streams show, it can't see anything after a few second. Getting a camera out of the trunk have it "stick around" and then have Dragon be observed later might be high risk = low reward, when the reward is a picture, and the risk is bashing into something.
  17. Dragon heat shield be like: Re-entering Earths atmosphere multiple times easy. Dealing with the most common surface area on Earth hard.
  18. I think the "10% Starships will fail" concept is another "Elon Engineering philosophy". What SpaceX would like to achieve is "pushing the limits where 10% fail", since there are plenty of limits to push, this means producing 11 crafts for every 10 missions. Its somewhat an extension of the "re-add 10% back into the design, because you un-designed too much". Instead, SpaceX would like to meet current expectations, (whatever the current goals are), except force at least 10% to break/fail to know where the boundaries are with the current system. Iterate, and continue to "push boundaries". Elon's background is in software, where there is a similar concept (at least in its idea) of Chaos Engineering, where you essentially try to break your system so you can test, and thus iterate against its weak points. Essentially you break your system expectantly, so its more prepared for the unexcepted. I'm sure Elon is familiar with the concept, and might be trying to apply it to Starship. This sort of goal is actually a genius way to solve the problem of getting to Mars. The factory should be optimized to keep pumping out Starships, even once they are stable with the current system, they will continue to iterate in the direction they need, along with iterating into failures to continue to push boundaries. Again, this is only possible if you can iterate fast enough, which so far SpaceX seems to be doing just fine. Once you get that scale of production, you can use them to continue to learn more about the current system by essentially throwing them at the problem, and potentially throwing the problem at them to seek out failure points, and margins. When doing something hard, making failure cheap, and being able to continue to iterate solutions can make iterating rather fast. SpaceX seems to be going this exact route, to tackle easily the hardest engineering problem available.
  19. I can go outside and not get blinding because I stared directly at the sun ;D I'd assume they would have a sunshade, if the nosecone isn't designed to be opened/closed all the time. On the I4 mission, are they in constant contact with SpaceX/the ground like a full on mission, or is it more periodic? Like is there a schedule planned before hand to make the most use of their time?
  20. I got the full game without playing the play test. Good fun, gotta tweak my HOTAS (or just wait for someone else to do it ;D) in the mean time... gotta learn how to build planes again haha
  21. Maybe we just have to dig to find the alien ruins, can't make it too easy
  22. Its easier and more feasible, but I would also weigh a lot more and probably end up being much slower. Even if you did get it to the target within a reasonable time-frame, you also have the issue you can only afford to build and send 1, which probably is a bad idea if your traveling at a percentage of lightspeed you might not even make it.
  23. I know some one who worked in aerospace and there was bonuses per pound for whoever could think of ideas to save weight, as the design was too heavy. One idea was to only have "little people" fly the planes, which would save a lot of weight in multiple categories. (Not sure of "little people" is offensive or not, I don't mean to offend, I just don't know what the preferred label is) SH has yet to be tested, the Starship tests are more verifying the ability to belly flop+land. Yes they use the same engine, but previous tests are focusing on testing other parts of the system (landing+belly flopping Starship) while testing engine performance. SH can't fly on its own and requires more engines to test, so Starship must be further along before getting to SH as its higher risk and harder to iterate on. The launch cadence needs to be extremely high to support orbital refueling, which is the only way anything gets anywhere.
  24. This might be a rather long wait, but Breakthrough Starshot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakthrough_Starshot
  • Create New...