JoeSchmuckatelli

For anyone else trying to figure out what an 'Integration Tower' is: SpaceX's Starship Booster Tower Is Rising in Texas | IE (interestingengineering.com) Building a sky-scraper sized dynamic structure at sea-level in the sand where high winds are the norm and hurricanes visit whenever they want... SX is nothing if not bold. But they are planning to launch from that are they not? With all the grating and the hole in the center - it looks to me like their launch platform they use for Starship.

It really is a military-horror game with stealth and FPS and looting as key elements. It's brutally hard to play well, and I'm hooked. On the other hand, I'm also over 50, and unlike my son (14) who crushes the PVP fights, I'm better at the stealth. It's simply deciding whether to stick to my inclination or try to adapt to the attack everything mentality that some players use I'm dithering over. (Oh, and I've watched Japanese, German and Russian streamers - and while I can only understand the English speakers and part of what the German dudes say - there are some amazing players out there with head-shot skills that must be admired!).

Why are the sections painted differently? Also: I assume the structure on the right is where they intend to launch the BFR, ahem, BN?

@kerbiloid Microsoft Word - current 1 plutonium (clarku.edu) --- The exposures in the RU studies likely resulted from inhalation, rather than mere external exposure. So unless your explorer pulls a "Chad" ... she will be fine.

... Not sure - but my past reading tells me that the greatest risk from environmental exposure to radioactive materials happens if a person ingests or inhales the substance. Otherwise, you're mostly at risk from being cooked - like standing too close to an unshielded microwave oven or radar dish. The 'radiation causes mutation' during cell reproduction (read: cancer risk) turns out to be actually quite low from external sources. So I'd think your intrepid traveler and Mars Rover fiddler would be at as much risk from sunlight unfiltered by atmosphere as she would from poking Percy with a screwdriver.

The Pu is on the Rover, right? And the human should be in an Exo-Suit. So... Why does he need to poke at the Rover again?

I posted a 'game theory' question in The Lounge section for anyone willing to help me. I like poker, and understand that certain strategies 'win over time' even if they lose in a given hand... so I'm the non-math guy trying to apply that concept in a different game. Appreciate any assistance.

I have a question about how Game Theory would suggest I approach a situation in another game I'm playing. Appreciate any insight! The game is a First Person Shooter (on the surface). It incorporates both Player vs Player and Player vs Environment (AI). Stealth is a major component of the game, and Players can 'win' a match without ever firing a shot. Players can also 'win' by killing everything they run into. Or any combo in between. The only true win condition is that the Player has to survive and extract. No respawns. Game economy is a major part of the experience. Time is another major factor, as it can take 4-6 minutes to get into a match, and 10-40 minutes to complete a match. Every death is a loss (time and money), or at best zero-sum (money). Players get to enter a match as one of two characters. Character 1 is set up however the player wants to set up (or can afford to set up) their character. They can choose high-class weapons that reduce their Time to Kill other players / AI, add armor to increase their survivability, add heals, etc. Character 1 has missions to accomplish, and can loot along the way. If Character 1 survives a match, everything brought in and found is the player's to keep (net profit). If Character 1 dies, everything is lost (net loss to player). Character 1s are also juicy targets for other players, because they bring in high value gear that other players can take. Character 2 is random, weak and low level. Primary purpose of Character 2 is to gather loot and extract and then sell to support Character 1's ability to accomplish missions. Anything Character 2 finds and extracts with is the player's to keep (net profit). If Character 2 dies, everything is lost (zero cost to player). Character 2s rarely have anything worth taking, but can find high-value gear and so they're worth looting (sometimes). Character 1s have a distinct advantage over Character 2s in all aspects of the match, excluding player skill. Matches comprise multiple players running either of their own Character 1 or Character 2 classes, and AI characters all on the same map. TTK for all characters is low, except as noted above. AI characters look like Character 2s, and view all Character 1's as enemies and will attack on sight. They are, however, generally weaker than Character 1s and easily dealt with, but can kill any player on the map. AI characters are not (initially) aggressive toward Character 2 players. Character 2 players can walk around AI and never be attacked - and even use AI to warn them if any Character 1s approach, and will fight Character 1s with the Character 2. However, if a Character 2 player kills any AI character, all AI now view that player as an enemy and will attack. AI characters are generally as strong as Character 2s, but are AI... so player skill generally rules these engagements. Character 1's view any other character on the map as an enemy. All Character 1s, Character 2s and AI are free to be attacked, and players can expect all of them to attack (or try to avoid) their Character 1. Character 2s are in a unique situation. All Character 1s are enemies, and much stronger, but profitable to kill, and will try to kill you - usually successfully. AI will ignore all Character 2s, until and unless the Character 2 attacks an AI or another Character 2, and then all AI are agro on the Player's Character 2. They will continue to ignore other Character 2s on the map. Other Character 2s are unpredictable. They are run by players and there are no rules: players can choose to attack or ignore other Character 2s and AI. There is no way to tell the difference between an AI or Character 2, outside of certain behaviors. Some players choose to attack and kill other Character 2s and all AI regardless of the AI agro penalty. Some players choose to avoid all contact and just loot Character 2 vs Character 2 is generally a coin-toss. Character 2 vs AI is generally a win for the player - 1v1... but certain areas have multiple AI, so this is a risky move. The question is - how to behave as a Character 2 player. Remember - time investment is a major factor, and the only win condition is survival. Modifying this is the need for the player to gather as much high-quality loot as possible to support the player's Character 1 progression. A stealth run with no contact and an extract is pure profit. A successful 'kill' run can be somewhat more profitable... Presuming you win. But this strategy brings another risk: the Character 1s looking for PVP tend to focus on and run toward the sound of fights, and AI ambushes are a real threat. However, a Character 2 pursuing a 'no conflict' or 'live and let live' vs other Character 2s and AI is at a distinct disadvantage (ceding initiative) to a different Character 2 looking for a fight. So given that time is valuable and the only win is to survive... is it smarter to be that agro PVP Character 2, or the stealth player (over time)?

I've known about shot manufacturing for decades - and yet I would have never made the connection that 'we were using microgravity here on earth'. Kind of a head slapper... ... because, of course when the lead is freely falling - which allows the surface tension to force the cooling lead into spheres - it is in 'free fall' and hence microgravity.

I'm still waiting for SX to drop a boatload of Starlinks into Mars orbit for their Boston Robotics Dog Army Invasion. That will be good TV.

Have we actually made stuff at 0g? (I tried to imagine how an asteroid miner could process ore... and outside of centrifuges, couldn't.)

Blade Runner?

https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/geologic-map-mars For reference @Xd the great

Heh.

Seems familiar. (If it aint broke, dont fixit)

SpaceX's Starship rocket is set to splash-land into the ocean near Hawaii in its first flight around the Earth, FCC filings show (msn.com) Anyone know if SX is looking for someone with experience chilling out on Navy ships for their recovery efforts? I'd be happy to have them fly me out to Hawaii so I can stay well back out of the way on some weather-deck and watch them recover this thing!

I think you're absolutely correct; going SS is 'their thing'. Still - a highly aspirational timeline. Edit: frankly, I love it. Their stark departure from the cautious pace of how things have been done for so long is one of the reasons I watch them with such interest

That is what I was thinking. Dragon is a working space craft. Starship is a proof of concept with one successful landing. Admittedly, the pace of SX is such that they might be able to get one or more SS's to space in the time frame - and possibly try to dock those behemoths... But that might be pushing it a bit. I did not read the award and specifications - but were it me - I'd throw up two Dragon's with a fuel-transfer apparatus in each - test in orbit and pocket the cash for SS

Contract to be completed by the end of '22? So - is this going to be a Starship demonstration, or two CargoDragon capsules with fuel inside?

If you can work out how to do it in conjunction with nuclear energy production - as part of an efficient cooling process, let me know. I want in early.

I asked a similar question quite a few pages back - and came away with the impression that it's just not feasible.

Why not? From 1886 to 1908 automobiles were largely bespoke creations. To become a ubiquitous part of the economic and technological background noise of the world we must move past treating rockets as special, fragile one-offs, and make them nothing more than machines we use whenever we need them

I'm not a rocket scientist - but I'm pretty sure one or two of the guys at Boca Chica are. On the other hand, I am a former Tanker and the Marine Corps let us swap turbine engines outside. Pretty sure turbines are intricate, even if they are not rocket engines. What's the difference?

And yet it seems to work

Given how much I pay for internet... ...times a whole bunch of people around the world... ... Three weeks?