Search the Community

yea but we want a bona-fide space-big-rig. we can talk about space trains later.

That was from the DeepMind paper of the same name at the top of the image, Levels of AGI (Nov 2023). https://arxiv.org/html/2311.02462v2 Here's the table caption: Table 1: A leveled, matrixed approach toward classifying systems on the path to AGI based on depth (performance) and breadth (generality) of capabilities. Example systems in each cell are approximations based on current descriptions in the literature or experiences interacting with deployed systems. Unambiguous classification of AI systems will require a standardized benchmark of tasks, as we discuss in the Testing for AGI section. Note that general systems that broadly perform at a level N may be able to perform a narrow subset of tasks at higher levels. The "Competent AGI" level, which has not been achieved by any public systems at the time of writing, best corresponds to many prior conceptions of AGI, and may precipitate rapid social change once achieved. They also have a set of levels for autonomy vs required human interaction. Regarding Siri... I have a feeling that nearly all of us on this forum at all live in a bubble. Think about the people you most commonly interact within the real world. What percentile of cognitive ability do you think they are? I'd wager people interested in a game about spaceflight and orbital mechanics are probably smarter than average. I hear about people selected at random from the population from my wife (well, not quite random, they have to be in a situation where they need a surgeon—very few trauma, or anything where it would select for being a dope, though). She sees several thousand people a year (~20/day?). I'll say something at dinner about something X, that I think people should do ideally, and she'll give me that "Do you live under a rock?" look (often verbalized in exactly those words, lol), then tell me people are too dumb to pick X. As lousy as Siri is, I'd not be surprised at this point if it was better than 50% of people—look at the % of kids within different grade levels who perform at grade level. (National Center for Educational Statistics) Level 2 is apparently an "8th grade" reading level, so 52.6% are not terribly literate. Honestly "reading levels" is pretty odd, I always considered reading a binary skill, you can't read, then you can—they are functionally sorting by cognitive ability I think, not "reading level," as the levels talk about reading and understand more and more complex ideas. Reading itself doesn't change in difficulty, words are words, and if you don't recognize one, you look it up (at any "reading level"). So yeah, it would not surprise me if Siri is better than ≥50% in whatever narrow task they were looking at (grammar?).

All this talk about fakes and fake fakes makes me just think we are living in a Philip K. Dick novel.

Trina Ray (lead scientist of Cassini's Titan flybys) gives a first hand talk about a few of the fantastic findings of the Cassini-Huygens mission. She talks a lot about how people reacted to the data as it unfurled and slowly pieced together some rather amazing big pictures. It's lovely, figured I'd share!

I kinda miss him/her, as well as the others that i used to talk 2 years ago in here... at least they're focusing on better stuff. I assume[or at least will within a few hours] that @TwoCalories will reply next

Jeb is happy mission has pretty much been an total success from the astronauts view. Enter Eve orbit then picked up Bill who sneak onboard the probe carrier and has 150 days in an rover seat was happy to get into the hitchhiker module and change underwear, he brought 5 K science. Here is the probe carrier at day 9. Designed to be very narrow as designed before medium fairings was unlocked. Just pushed the lander out a bit to let the Gilly lander drop off early. First mistake, should have gone 1+6 medium tanks and two nuclear engines, then 6 rovers rather than 2 landers. we had the technology. Gilly lander worked well. Look closely at the left lander and you can see Bill. It was an luck that Bill went on an intentional unmanned mission as he could transmit more science home earlier. Here he is on the Gilly lander who has no landing legs, an docking port would be more fitting. He reported one problem outside of old underwear. You can crash into space around Gilly, Bill has an theory that gravity is so weak it create the opposite of an event horizon. Jeb think Bill has smelled his dirty underwear for to long. He also had problems finding the Oblique Impact Site, Jeb yes that huge crater is so hard to find. At the same time a probe landed on Eve The rover seat is so an kerbal can collect atmospheric samples in low eve orbit. But the orbital module has no batteries just 5 charge from the small probe and I did not want to risk 6 K science getting 2.2 early. Landed at Eve Environmental science let you transmit 1000, material science data is 1200, missed olympus, shallows and sea who is also land biomes all giving 2200. 6600 Science missed + the 600 atmospheric from Olympus. and the extra returned from Olympus. Not to talk about the discoverables. I say its plausible to uncover the big sperical tanks and fairings to cover them before reaching Duna. Collecting Bill And 6 K science Here is the Eve manned ship. An last note after picking up the science we docked with the now empty probe carrier to get some more hydrogen, getting the 11 k science home asap is obviously an priority. It had 5 K dV, grabbed half of it, wanted to use the probe carrier to aid in mapping Eve. As carrier was empty it should still have decent with dV but it showed as 0 dV for quite some time until it showed 3 k who make more sense.

Since we're celebrating, here's a few of my favorite community contributions over the past year; I think I've watched jeremybrett1933's LET'S ROCK video probably every day since it's been out. Just gets me HYPED Datau03's recreation of the classic Build Fly Dream trailer is fantastic Inspired by KSP1's Final Frontier double F mod, Wayfarer's Wings by KSP2 Modder leonardfactory adds an accolade system so you can track the achievements of all your Kerbals. Incredible work. Diana Gearhead's engineering of airships has been truly impressive, especially considering we couldn't figure it out and she wouldn't tell Nate how they worked for MONTHS. Bradley Whistance's returning to content creation to cover KSP2 was really exciting. If you haven't seen his videos, check em out. @Socraticat's Halloween Pumpkin was the talk of the office the week they shared it. They blew our own office pumpkin carvings out of the water. Madishmike's Titanic definitely wins my Boat of the Year award. The amount of detail they managed to fit in is just incredible. I genuinely could not stop laughing the day this hit the top of /r/KSP. ---- There's A LOT more that I just couldn't get to in this post, but I did make a series of Community Highlights posts here on the forums all last year. Definitely check out those. And if you have a favorite piece of KSP2 content/moment from the past year, share it below! Thanks for playing our game and thanks for making this community a joy to work with. Here's to more greatness in 2024!

YEAR 3, DAY #̷̛̛̝̮͕̙͍͈͇͎̫̝̈́̆̍̅̂́͆̑̏̓̊́̉̊̾̾̂͌͘̚̕͜͠͠%̶̛̝̺̩̱͓͍͌̑͆́̽́̐̊͋̋̆̓̏̐̀̀́̈́͂̋͌͐̅̕͘@̷̢̧̤̯͍͉͚͖̱̟̣̩̝͓͕͓͖̹̤͚̠͕́͛̋̇́̀́̉́̽̿̽̉͐̑̎͗̍̈́̋̾͂̕͝͝ͅͅͅ#̵̡̺͂̃̔̈͝͝ - THE SECRET SPACE PROGRAM In the middle of the Desert, crews have been working tirelessly to make a spacecraft capable of lifting our crew up to the Mun. We need to see what's going on there. A mysterious bunch of lights has just been sitting still. The crew have been carefully selected (since they're our only crew). The goal of the mission is to plant a flag on the mysterious object, collect samples, and then bring them back to Kerbin. I will not talk for the rest of the mission, given the nature of what happened. I'll just use the verbal logs. CREW VERBAL LOG [REDACTED] KERMAN: [REDACTED], skies are empty. You are clear for liftoff. JOEMON KERMAN: Roger that. JOEMON KERMAN: Woah! Alright, mission control. Starting roll procedure. [REDACTED] KERMAN: Copy, roll program. [REDACTED] KERMAN: Alright [REDACTED], you're go for stage separation. ANFIELD KERMAN: Copy that, go for stage sep. [REDACTED] KERMAN: Alright, [REDACTED], you're in a stable parking orbit. In T- 20 minutes, you'll be go for TMI. TIM C. KERMAN: Copy that, [REDACTED]. Readying engine. JOEMON KERMAN: Alright, mission control, TMI burn successful. See you at the Mun [REDACTED] KERMAN: Copy that, [REDACTED]. See you at the Mun. *** [REDACTED] KERMAN: Good morning, [REDACTED]! How'd your trip go? JOEMON KERMAN: We are good. mission control. Waiting for the go for landing. ... [REDACTED] KERMAN: Your go, [REDACTED]. *** ANFIELD KERMAN: Alright, mission control. We are well on are way to intercept the object. [REDACTED] KERMAN: Copy. 9km altitude, in counting. TIM C. KERMAN: 45m from the surface. Continuing engine puffs... Contact! TIM C. KERMAN: I don't see anything, did we come here for nothing? JOEMON KERMAN: Look up, Tim. TIM C. KERMAN: Oh. I see it now! ANFIELD KERMAN: Okay, so are we not going to talk about WHAT THE HELL IT IS? [REDACTED] KERMAN: A- alright, [REDACTED]. You're g-go for EVA. ANFIELD KERMAN: Breakin' up a little there, mission control. TIM C. KERMAN: Alright, mission control. I'm on top of the structure... preparing the flag. TIM C. KERMAN: Alright, mission --ntrol. I'm ----bing ---- do--. [REDACTED] KERMAN: [REDACTED]? [REDACTED], we're losing contact. TRANSMISSION ENDED 1 minute later, [REDACTED] started transmitting to mission control again. Pictures from the lander show the crew are gone. Just entirely gone, with no trace. What happened? Many thoughts fly through mission control's heads. Everyone at once looks at each other, an realizes: this is no structure. What they're looking at is a full on portal. We need to dig deeper...

1. You’re already making up technology so why not make up whether something works or not? 2. The challenges would be that the technology you envision is fantastical and might not even be feasible. The time travel machine especially is just pure fantasy, even if forward time travel might be possible there is no small machine that could produce it. 3. To quote Ant-Man, “Don’t talk to your past self, don’t bet on sporting events.”

Scaling the wings is a first step towards doing it for other parts, so it's possible. We already have a capacity to use Space Shuttle/Rover parts in landers, jets, etc. We don't know what the colony parts are yet. It stands to reason it'd be a different mechanic to the VAB. There's been plenty of talk about an orbital VAB, but nothing about a colony designer, so it stands to reason the Colonies will be... less about creativity than spaceships. At least, unless we hear something big and new. Still, that doesn't include mods, or the creative use of panels/struts/beams. We've seen everything from the Batwing to a Christmas Tree. And when we get to the interstellar level, who knows what that'll scale up to?

I'm not sure if this already exists, but welp. Any interested parties can talk about SETI and alien life, etc. here. I tried running the Wow! signal (6EQUJ5) through a Caesar cipher decoder. Well, that was a waste of time. I just realized this. The string 6EQUJ5, commonly misinterpreted as a message encoded in the radio signal, represents in fact the signal's intensity variation over time, expressed in the particular measuring system adopted for the experiment. The signal itself appeared to be an unmodulated continuous wave, although any modulation with a period of less than 10 seconds or longer than 72 seconds would not have been detectable. Oof. I guess I'll keep klutzing with the Wow! signal.

I'm somewhat in agreement here - The commitment not being met sucks. But I think its because they chose a really, really bad metric to try and report on. Very few games use their bug log as their major development communications for a reason. Most games do some regularly scheduled feature blog, or developer touchpoint or design talk. But Intercept is extremely reluctant to talk about that due to prior delivery promises slipping, and the longer they go without talking about them, the worse the potential response gets. After all, if they come talking now about the absolute barebone basic design principles of science, people will assume that they're only now just nailing them down. And god forbid if they're playtesting and find out something they designed isn't fun and needs rework (this is a common occurance) and the community gets it in their heads that they're incompetent at gameplay design. I've mentioned before how the relationship has gotten adversarial. Every communication is carefully crafted, curated, and reviewed because they're frankly afraid of making it worse by saying something wrong, and a lot of us are seeking blood in the water - we're mad, some of us probably excessively so, and we're looking for justifications for that anger. We're well past the point that we could get a post from a science guy talking about this cool part he's messing with, because next week it'll be scrapped cuz it wasn't fun to design missions around, and the community will riot. They chose bug fixes to report on because nobody can get mad at a bugfix, and then I'm guessing the delivery keeps slipping because they're holding out for every last possible little fix - it may be seen as preferable to delay an update so that the update has at least one changed status, over posting an update early that just shows nothing moving 'cross the board.

Good afternoon, Kerbonauts. This past week has been a learning experience. My last post here received a lot of comments, many of which expressed doubt, frustration, and in some cases even anger about either the seeming lack of progress on KSP2 or the perception that I am concealing some dark reality about the state of the game. Our team has been reading your comments and asking one another if there’s some way we can do better. In the past, every item in these forum posts has had to cross a threshold of certainty - I don’t want to announce some new feature or target date, only to experience a trust-eroding failure to follow through. I feel this burden especially keenly because in the past I have personally announced dates that turned out to be incorrect. For that reason, I have avoided talking about features in progress, bugs under investigation, or internal delivery deadlines. With a game this complex, nothing is ever assured until it has been thoroughly tested by QA. When you combine this "stay quiet until you’re absolutely sure" ethos with a more dispersed update cadence, what you get is long periods of silence. Now, of course I haven’t gone literally silent. I still post here every week. Before each post goes out, I meet with the production and community teams to review the past week’s progress, and a great many exciting developments are discussed. They often take the form of "we’ve made great progress on x category of super annoying bug" or "this feature looks good but we haven’t had time to fully validate it yet." By my standard of "don’t talk about it until it’s truly done," neither of those scenarios yields anything that’s safe to post about. What is safe, then? Well, for the most part, content updates (new art, new parts, new graphics improvements) come along in nice, neat little parcels that are not only visually pleasing, but also unlikely to generate an unmet expectation. They’re fun and they’re safe, and artists are always creating new content. So you see lots of that. But the other thing you see lots of is some variation on "improved stability and performance." That’s my catch-all term for that very meaningful category of progress that, because of my reluctance to write bad checks, can’t yet be talked about in detail. When I hold back on such items, I comfort myself that the less I reveal now, the more surprising the patch notes will be when we finally release them. Still, I’m questioning my choice to withhold information about systems in progress. Yes, there’s always the chance that when we talk about a feature in development, that we’re also creating an expectation that the feature will be present in the next update. Similarly daunting is the possibility that we’ll announce that we’re working on something that the community perceives as "easy" (an especially common situation when we’re working on a feature that is already functional in the original KSP), and then take such a long time delivering that feature that people may decide we don’t know what we’re doing. In such cases, we then need to take the time to explain in technical detail why the implementation of such and such a feature is non-trivial in KSP2. Increased transparency carries costs, and those costs always have to be balanced against other feature-facing work we could be doing. So what I’m going to try to do right now is to extend some trust to you. I’m going to talk about a few things that are not yet complete so that you can at least see some of the ropes we’re hauling on every day - some of which may prove to be long. This list is not exhaustive (there are dozens of people working on dozens of items simultaneously, and there are some features that we really do want to be surprises), but it will hopefully give you some visibility into the breadth of issues we’re tackling. Please do not assume that if a bug didn’t get mentioned in this list that it is unknown to us or not being worked on — this is a top-ten list. Our bug prioritization is broadly guided by the following logic: Category A: any bug that causes loss of a vehicle in flight (physics issues, trajectory instability, decoupling instability, loss of camera focus, unexpected part breakage/RUD) Category B: any bug that affects the fidelity or continuity of a saved game (rigidbody degradation, save file inflation, loss of vehicle or Kerbal during instantiation or focus switching) Category C: any bug that negatively affects the expected performance of a vehicle (drag occlusion, staging issues, thrust asymmetry, joint wobbliness, landing leg bounciness) Category D: any VAB bug that prevents the player from creating the vehicle they want to make (symmetry bugs, fairing/wing editor bugs, strut instability, inconsistent root part behavior) While there are many bugs that live outside these four categories (and in some cases, such bugs end up getting sorted out during normal feature development), the four categories above are the biggest fun killers. Until a player can envision a vehicle, create it without being impeded by VAB issues, fly it with a reasonable expectation that physical forces will be consistently applied, and save their progress at any point without worrying about the fidelity of that save, the KSP2 experience will be compromised. Obviously, now that we are layering in progression mechanics (Science gathering and transmission, missions, and R&D tech tree) in preparation for downstream Roadmap updates, the importance of addressing these issues only increases. Therefore, here are a few of the biggest issues we’re wrangling with right now: Vehicles in stable coasting orbits sometimes experience orbit instability/decay - Status: possible fix in progress Trajectories change when vehicles cross SOI boundaries - Status: fix in progress (see below) Certain inline parts cause aerodynamic drag numbers to spike - Status: under investigation Returning to craft from VAB causes craft to go underground (possibly related to Kerbals and landed vehicles dropping through terrain while being approached) - Status: possible fix being tested Decoupling events result in various issues including loss of control, incorrect controllability of decoupled subassemblies, loss of camera focus, and other issues - Status: may have many causes, but some fixes in progress (see below) Save files get bigger over time (TravelLog experiencing "landed" status spam) - Status: fix being tested Opening part manager causes major frame lag - Status: experiments ongoing Major post-liftoff frame rate lag immediately above launchpad (associated with engine exhaust lighting) - Status: fix being tested Root parts placed below decouplers cause issues with stage separation - Status: under investigation Vehicle joints unusually wobbly, some part connections unusually weak - Status: under investigation We’re tracking down some strange vehicle behaviors associated with spurious autostrut errors. As we’ve discussed here before, some radially-attached parts are reinforced by additional invisible autostruts to improve their stability. It turns out that these autostruts don’t always break cleanly during decoupling events, and may be the cause of some of our more frustrating decoupling issues (including those where detached vehicle elements appear to still affect one another’s behavior). We’re still investigating this one, but we have high hopes that its correction will result in a reduction of mission-killing errors. Finally, we have zeroed in on the cause of some of the trajectory errors we’ve been seeing - especially the situation in which a trajectory changes spontaneously when crossing an SOI boundary. This one is deep in the code and its correction may end up fixing a few other downstream issues. This is a complicated problem, however, and we may not solve it in time for the June update. We should know more about this one soon. I’ve provided the list above as a stopgap. We have been discussing internally how best to improve bug status visibility so that you have a better idea of what we’re working on. We’re looking at a lot of options right now, and I’ll update you when we’ve settled on something. We recognize the need for this transparency and we’ll come to a solution soon. ANYWAY... we have some nice content news! Update v0.1.3.0 will be the first KSP2 update to contain not only bug fixes, but a few new parts. Right now, we can confirm the arrival of the following: A.I.R.B.R.A.K.E Clamp-O-Tron shielded docking port Clamp-O-Tron Inline Docking Port MK2 Clamp-O-Tron Docking Port Cornet Methalox Engine (new small extensible-nozzle orbital engine) Trumpet Methalox Engine (new medium extensible-nozzle orbital engine) Tuba Methalox Engine (new large extensible-nozzle orbital engine) S3-28800 Large Inline Methalox tank (longer version of large methalox tanks) Here’s some video of those new engines in action. The Tuba has individually-swiveling mini-nozzles that might be one of part designer Chris Adderley’s coolest ideas yet (final parts built by Pablo Ollervides, Jonathan Cooper, and Alexander Martin): new_engine_testing.mp4 We are still testing the new grid fins. Because these parts require some special part module support, engineering work is ongoing. Due to the complexity of this work, we don’t believe grid fins will make it into the v0.1.3.0 update. Last week’s challenge produced a few spiffy designs. Check out this rocket, with which user Well braved the Kraken and managed to deposit a lander at the bottom of the Mohole: Gotta respect the ingenuity of using antennae for landing legs: Thanks to those who participated! Next up, at the suggestion of @RyanHamer42 on Twitter, we’re building space stations! Your mission, should you choose to accept it: Primary goal: build a station by docking at least two Wayfarer habitat modules together in orbit above Kerbin Secondary goal: add a deployable solar panel truss and a fuel depot tank to your station Jeb-level goal: dock a transfer tug to your station and place the station in orbit above another planet Val-level goal: send a lander to your station that can be reused for down-and-up flights to the surface of the planet below Thanks for the suggestion, Ryan! Good luck, everyone!

you can recolour using part variants, there are a couple of posts on the forum on that talk about that. in the past you could assign a different texture in the model section, I've not been able to get that to work sinds 1.7 texture replacer might be able to do this for you I just edit the textures in place ..... dds2png (xnconvert) then photoshop and then back.

Annnnnd, less than 2 months after that, I decided against it. I talked it over with others to get their perspective, and decided to flip majors to engineering science last spring. Luckily, a handful of classes do overlap with engineering technology, like calculus and English 1. I also recently decided to transfer, and last month, I was accepted into a state school for Mechanical Engineering (Aerospace concentration). Right now, I'm in Calc 3, Physics 2, and a couple others at my community college, and it's going well so far. Other parts of my thoughts and plans haven't changed. I was still exposed to some interesting stuff in engineering technology, and I do plan to get a Master's (not necessarily the accelerated track, I'll have to talk it over with my advisor next month). I am wondering about opinions about taking extra courses not required for your undergraduate or graduate though. I went through the course catalog, and there are some electives that aren't a part of the normal curriculum, like mechanical vibrations, and combustion. I was also looking at a few classes in a non-degree program at a more expensive nearby college which offers aerospace courses my college doesn't offer like gas dynamics and orbital mechanics. Maybe I can go for a double major in Mechanical and Aerospace?

It's light, but it takes up a lot of space. You try docking Phoenix to a ship with a bunch of other vehicles. Same goes for the rovers. They are not incredibly huge, but they all have wheels stuck on long trusses for stability, and that take up lots of space. Basically, every vehicle I'm carrying around has a very large base for wheels, or large wings. Most are also long. And let's not even talk about Garibarge. Part 2: Launching Flying Christmas Tree 2 With all the landers in place, Flying Christmas Tree 2 may be the most majestic ship I ever launched. Or the most silly. Probably both. 2.1) Launching Flying Christmas Tree 2 with Tamarromobile 2.2) Launching Not Albatross 2.3 Launching Garibarge 2.4) Launching Phoenix 2.5) Launching Leaping Mantis, and refueling

[Reshare - Consolidating (my) Agencies of Kerbin and their Craft into One Place] Tier 0 (No Tech) Agency: United Rocket Director: Kuku Kerman Craft : KSP Builds - Kerbicus_S1 Kerbal News Right Then: Your Premier Source for Cosmic Chronicles! United Rocket boldly Launches their Newest design - Kerbicus S-1 Sub Orbital Jumper In a twist that's got Kerbin's space enthusiasts buzzing louder than a swarm of startled space bees, eccentric tech guru Kuku Kermin has launched United Rocket, a brand new venture poised to shake up the interstellar scene. And who's leading the charge? None other than ace pilot Kip Kerman, famed daredevil extraordinaire! and one time partner of Jebidiah Kerman himself! The launch of United Rocket comes hot on the heels of a manifesto Kuku wrote in college detailing dissatisfaction with the tactics of certain agencies leveraging "discounted" orbital packages to curry favor with green authority figures. Seizing an opportunity, Kuku Kermin rallied support from anonymous hedge funds and blasted off into the unknown by privately incorporating United Rocket. Rumours inside the agency talk of initial names trying to capture the imagination of Kerbins Everywhere. Space K was apparently tossed around before the board decided United would be a good word choice to foster the perception of global solidarity. But it's not just business maneuvering that's making headlines – it's the personal drama unfolding between Kip Kerman and his former partner Jebidiah. Following a three-year coma that saw him lose both Val and his stake in their business, Kip is back and ready to reclaim his place in the stars. Jeb, for his part, has been open to interviews, but a lack of available interpreters has left reporters scratching their helmets in confusion. Seen Here Maneuvering the craft through the clouds is famed daredevil United Rocket's game plan? To test their craft extensively before offering them for commercial use, all while allowing eager enthusiasts to own their very own United Rocket rocket. Their maiden vessel, the Kerbicus_S1 Sub Orbital Jumper, made its debut to a live broadcast, much to the delight of hopeful Kerbals everywhere. And despite the absence of a fireworks show, the vessel took off without a hitch, proving that even amateur rocket enthusiasts can soar through the clouds. However, reports suggest that Jeb is less than thrilled about the Kerbicus, especially since it's primarily constructed from parts he was forced to relinquish in a settlement agreement with Kip. Yet, Kip remains undeterred, boldly declaring, "The Kerbicus is so easy to fly I bet Jeb could manage!" as the spokesperson for United Rocket. There you have it, dear readers: the space race just got a whole lot spicier, with United Rocket firing up its engines and Kip Kerman at the helm. Buckle up and hold onto your helmets, because it looks like we're in for a wild ride through the cosmos! Stay tuned to Kerbal News Right Then for all the latest updates, gossip, and gravity-defying antics. Until next time, keep reaching for the stars and never forget to laugh along the way!

Yeah, that is a fair take. I hate to indulge in the inevitable drama that results from this kind of ambiguous silly analogy, honestly, but regardless of what he meant, it still feels to me like that's what we're expected to do: Deal with what we have now, because sometime maybe eventually in the future things will be better. And I acknowledge the irony of saying this in the wake of a video where they specifically talk about short term solutions, but... I mean, why would we need to talk about short term solutions? I don't feel the damage they could cause would be outweighed by the sentiment of neglect that I feel has grown, at least in my own experience

there are a lot of choices in the tech tree the more you go, and it can be overwhelming. I wanted to see what you guys thought! Me personally, I go for either the cheapest, or I think ahead and go for the science.

Just my 5 cent, but showing that tool with a bit of explaining text and a few pictures would likely be much more informative than this talk was, which just repeated points that were made in the past. And it would be a more convincing demonstration that there is progress and not just talk - the issue with these talks is that people (rightfully or not, different discussion) feel that past communication hasn't bee reliable.

why do you assume that's not what they're going to do? They've been investigating this for a while, so there's definitely a good chance that they've come up with some short and long term solutions that they want to address. Also, wobbliness is what's been the community's biggest issue so far, the fact that they're talking about it makes it communication. The community broadcasted it's concerns about this, and they heard it, and will address it. that's the 2-way you're talking about. or do you want them to hold your hand and bring you on the talk so you can express the same things everyone else has over and over again? let's see tomorrow after the talk if they've discussed possible solutions or not.

Communication is two-way. Sticking your fingers in your ears and announcing “a talk about wobbly rockets” (a talk, not a discussion, not addressing it, not discussing possible solutions — and they are masters in picking their words when it comes to this) without any regards for what has the most attention right now isn’t communicating. It’s broadcasting with a bull horn and showing no interest in what goes on in the community.

Well I didn't read the bug reports before playing this mission, so it was an obvious solution to me for a Jool-5 capable probe. Too bad this propulsion technology is not ready yet in this game. I've been reading the KERB updates, and they talk about acceleration under time warp bugs, but without specifically pointing the Dawn engine Thank you for the link. From my uninformed point of view, there seem to be multiple unrelated bugs affecting ion engines and time warp. I will read the full thread when I'll have the time, and maybe I'll share my save. It might help the devs and the QA dep.

There was an issue with attaching exhaust prefabs in v1.6.10.0, which should be fixed in v1.6.10.1 (in case that was the problem), though it seems there's still some issues there that we're looking at. I'm not sure about the muzzle flash effects, but examining the KSP.log file would be the first step. BDA+ usually gives errors or warnings if there's something missing. I don't think that's possible, no. There was some talk at one point about making custom turrets, but I don't think it ever got beyond just talking about it due to how complicated it very quickly becomes trying to handle the weird designs people invariably make. Check the KSP.log file or in-game messages for errors or exceptions. Enabling "Debug Spawning" in BDA's debug settings will add more details to the log, which may help. If it's completely failing to spawn, then there's most likely an issue with the craft file (missing parts or the file is otherwise corrupted). I'm not sure what could cause a spawned craft to end up sticking into the ground, but likely the log would give some indication as to why.