JoeSchmuckatelli

Entropy?

Now with glowing mercury!

?

It may get exciting for them after they land...

I agree that the likelihood is low; what I don't like is the rattling of that particular saber. That was, not only odd, it was unnecessary. Kind of like me looming over a 4th grader and then saying "I'm bigger than you." (something both odd, unnecessary, and creepily threatening). Interesting that you assess the second part of your quote as a particular possibility; I've not read that situation as 'going there.'

Allow me to point out that he's using the same PPE as you use you protect yourself against sawdust. @steve9728

Dunno why that q'd 2x. The 'leak at a reactor' scenario, while frightening, isn't actually all that dangerous comparatively. We are in a scenario, where for the first time since... perhaps the Kennedy/Khruschev administrations where the risk of intentional use of nuclear weapons is a real possibility.

Those who don't know history are doomed to recreate it

This is cool: In a sacred pool, researchers see reflections of Phoenicians' past (nbcnews.com)

Well played, sir

Any bets on how long after installation someone spray paints or fat black markers it?

Edit: I go back to a phrase I read long ago, attributed to Ambrose Bierce: "War is the untying of a political knot with the teeth, that would not yield to the tongue." I firmly hope that we continue to be able to find political solutions to our problems that don't require that particular tooth.

This is actually my greatest secret fear. Once that box is opened... I cannot forget that humanity's ability to be horrible to one another is not always deterred by our abhorrence of that trait. We also have the ability to justify pretty much anything to ourselves; regardless of the ultimate cost. Dresden and Tokyo were 'conventional' while Hiroshima and Nagasaki were novel and, sadly, convenient. We have a history that shows our capacity w/o the use of nuclear weapons; and the only thing holding us back is willpower. I hate to admit to myself - but in some ways its simply a matter of time before something stupid happens.

Also - when looking at the broad number of warheads; don't default to thinking they're all on ICBMs waiting to kill cities. A whole bunch have been reserved for local and short-range tactical use. However: Russia Has A Massive Stockpile of 'Tactical' Nuclear Weapons - 19FortyFive So... perhaps not has 'calming' as one might think. But depending upon where you are in the world (i.e. some place like Pucallpa, Peru or Mbahiakro, Cote d'Ivoire) this might be more or less comforting.

The sheer enthusiasm is awesome! They must be quite pleased. (So much better than a quibbling 'uh-oh'!)

I have Civ VI... and its... 'good' - but not as compelling a title as it once was. They've squashed so much stuff into it that the timelines seem compressed. Like, you spend so much time working your way up to swordsmen - and then before you know it your tech advances are going so fast that you've already got Muketeers and then you're racing for spaceflight. Wars and movement are ridiculous in this scenario by the way. I had a campaign where I was getting ready to have a conflict with a neighbor; both of us had sword/spear and horse units, and by the time I got to the point where I had defeated his initial invasion army and was setting up to conquer territory I was fielding riflemen. Before long I had mech infantry running all over the place and was pushing to get the tech to build spaceflight... and suddenly realized I wasn't really having fun. I wish they had baked into the game the ability to work in 'Eras' - so I could have a long game that let me work my way up through the age of iron, or play the Rennaissance to Industrialization periods. Also - they've spent so much on graphics that the map often just looks busy. ... Frankly - I wish there was a way to get some really old game, like the original Medieval Total War running; that was a slow, well paced and strategic game (if I recall correctly). The later Total War games just went off the rails. If you want something fun and quirky, try Satisfactory.

You know... when I first started watching them build that tower, like many things at SX, I was almost thinking, "What in the... this will never work; will it?" But seeing that lift and stack being done outside - as opposed to what NASA has traditionally done (cool in an of itself) - is TOTALLY next level. Man - I am looking forward to seeing that thing fly!

This is kind of what I was afraid of. I'm guessing that with vehicles of the masses the depot and the SS FuelTruck will have that minor velocity can have a big impact. Being able to soft-dock or have an "Expanse"-style docking tube between vessels seemed like a good solution; but apparently orbital mechanics hasn't gotten the memo from Hollywood!

@ARS - I'll give you a little background to explain where I am coming from to help you evaluate my advice and opinions. I've been building my own systems since the mid '90s. I'm competent, but hardly an expert. My focus has always been a high quality, rock solid, competitive gaming machine that is cost effective, rather than chasing bleeding edge performance. The core of my strategy is to have a tick-tock upgrade cycle where I alternatively skip generations of CPU and GPU. Year 1 I bought a really good computer. Year 2 I installed one of the new-fangled discrete GPU cards (skipped the NEW - Wow CPU) . Year 3 I upgraded CPU (skipped the NEW-WOW GPU). Year 4 and GPU tech had greatly improved so I got a new GPU. etc. Etc. Every decision was made to maximize the impact for the dollars spent - and it was driven by where the improvements really were and how they'd affect the games I play. A LOT of generations, despite the ad campaigns, were really minor tweaks and iterations - so that buying the NEW-WOW wasn't really a value (a few frames here or a new shader there). Fundamentally I changed my system when architecture changed and the improvements from the Gen I had and the new architecture were significant. Lately its been 2 and sometimes 3 generations per cycle, because real improvement from Gen to 'Gen' in how the system performs in games has been actually minimal, presuming I bought a good product each time.* (When I sensed the system was finally getting slow enough to be noticed - only then was it time for an upgrade... Benchmarks and artificial frame number hype be damned!) This let me spend money in what for me was a reasonable manner and kept my wife happy with my hobby! CPU upgrades, btw, often came with Mobo and RAM upgrades due to the architecture changes. (This is not a cheap hobby!). Along the way came other things like switching first to a SSD and then NVMe, etc. What you don't see in there is me buying a new monitor, or PSU or fans or a case or a whole lot of stuff that you can spend money on. The only thing that bit me in the butt was ignoring the PSU. That created an expensive problem for me several years ago. I had a great GPU and a good CPU and Mobo and suddenly my system fell apart. The underpowered PSU destroyed my efficiency. It also ate a pretty darn good Mobo and CPU. It took way too long to figure out the problem ( working with the truly knowledgeable people over at [H] ardforums. Highly recommend you join and ask questions, especially if you are interested in system building as a hobby) The PSU in my system now is a 850 watt Corsair. Like the 750 I linked to above. Having overhead in the PSU is now a priority for me - and also means that I don't have to upgrade it very often. Computer components have gotten power hungry and overhead in the PSU protects the expensive components from overheating, voltage spikes and all the other electrical shenanigans that you don't want to affect your expensive equipment. Similarly, my UPS protects me from the vagaries of the power grid. All of that is to say that sometimes it pays to spend money smartly on the non-sexy stuff that doesn't get the hype and performance videos we are all subject to. So if you really are thinking about this as a hobby, ask whether it's better to by a $60 500w now and another higher watt in 1-2 years, or $80 for a 750 which should give you several years, or go whole hawg. The caveat of my advice is this: I'm not an expert. There are people who have the inclination to run the numbers and figure out exactly whether a 650 is good enough for you or whether you need/want more. I'm more of a 'gist' guy. GL and have fun! *. (Notable exception was last year when I bought a 3070 and a new Ryzen CPU - because both of the new architectures were notable upgrades over the aging system I'd been running) Edit - oh, one last thing! Buying one of the 'name brand' units (like Corsair) comes with QOL features like easy cable management and options for multiple connections. I really like the Corsair way better than the first cheap 500w I bought back when I was recovering from my underpowered mistake!

Two Wrongs Don't Make a "Right"? (Sorry, PoliSci/Law background)

Thanks! I guess what I'm asking is whether the two SS's can just pull up alongside one another and have a flex tube or arm extend between the two... or if they're going to have to mate both together every time with some hard coupling? Any guesses / info on that?

I don't know enough about rocket fuels - but would some kind of flexible hose between the two ships work (like mid-air or under-way refueling of aircraft or ships)? Or is the cryo aspect such that they need to figure out how to transfer cryogenic fuels through a hard-docked mechanism to keep the fuels at the proper temps?

Derp. Thanks!

I'm more inclined to think the total vehicle weight was 80kg with a 40kg warhead; lazy reporting or reporting by people who don't know military hardware is excruciatingly common. Double warheads are usually for very specific (armored) targets... or things like ships where a combination of effects is desired. You generally don't need complicated warheads for soft or targets of opportunity.

I didn't watch the whole video... but why does it end with an explosion of Starship?