Search the Community

Again, we fall under the same disagreement: If your boss tells you to do bad work, and you just follow his instructions, you are a bad worker. I understand office politics and lazyness leading to you to just follow those orders because it can prove beneficial, however you don't get to also complain about the state of the industry, layoffs and what not when you're being exactly part of the problem by taking 4 weeks to produce some basic code. So when you're cleaning house of bad apples, you need to fire the musicians, and the people ready to dance to them. Sadly, when most of these layoffs happen, they fire only the dancers, but some very scarce times they also fire only the musicians. I don't remember a case where both get the boot. Voting with your wallet can be completely irrelevant depending on scale. In our current case, even if we round up everybody left in this forum and the discord (~1000 active people) we'll never get TTI to do anything about it but laugh. This is my last message on this topic as I don't want to do off topic. If we can continue this talk, hopefully it'll be on another thread that isn't sent to get lost in the shadow real of irrelevant subforums.

i renumber burt rutan's tech talk about how fast we went from shoddy gliders to landing on moon, and that the past few decades have done nothing nearly as impressive as that burst in development. with spacex and others pushing the envelope again, this slump seems like its to come to an end. these kind of development cycles seem to happen in bursts. we just get to the point where we dont feel like barking up the same tree even though there might be juicer fruit on the higher branches. nuclear is in a similar situation and because of a couple bombs and 3 accidents at powerplants were afraid a coconut will land on our head and we leave that tree alone. based entirely off the half a paragraph i managed to read before my eyes wigged out. also i do kind of like the idea of winged boosters. its kind of the role skylon should be designed for rather than ssto. it doesnt even need to go to orbit or even build up enough speed where reentry becomes a hot mess. it just needs to loft stage two high enough so it has time to complete a circularization burn. of course the end result to that is an overcomplicated falcon that can take off from any airport. what we need to do is figure out how to make that kick stage recoverable. but it has to deal with the same issues that starship does. so again it feels like a hard way to reinvent the wheel. still the landing part of reusable second stages is going to be a huge problem both here and on other bodies (heat shield is still an issue but it looks like we have made some headway at least, eg move the flap roots leeward as planned, even make them retractable, eg on linear bearings). think we really need to start looking at lateral engine mounting, except now the turbopumps have to be able to move propellant half way up the ship under thrust gravity. as a second stage this can be reduced depending on whatever loft time your first stage (winged or otherwise) gave you. also fine for lifting off of moon/mars and keeps the regolith out of the engines. but then your structural loads from thrust need to be handled and more mass required (possibly also from a slightly bigger turbopump) again less of a problem at low gravity (real or otherwise) but you must also support the weight of the engine. and losing one of the two pods would be bad. multiple engines per pod would be better but then you need to isolate them better so you dont get a cascade failure in the pod. complex geometry like this also makes re-entry problematic (see starship's liquid metal flaps). heat shields like to be simple.

Here where I live, we call this the Mediocrity Pact: you pretend you are doing meaningful work, I pretend I'm doing meaningful work, and we cover our arses so no one will caught us. 10 to 15 years ago, I was hired on a Industry to help code some firmware - not going to give too much details on this one, you will understand soon. First thing I did: I spend a whole week reading every single piece of technical paper the project had, including protocol specifications. Second thing I did, I specified exactly what I would be doing, feature by feature, with alternative paths to handle the expected exceptions. It became a PHD thesis compared to the specification documents they were used to. It took me a month and a half, a time my immediate manager wanted me to do some coding. But I had someone above him getting my back, because I did my way nevertheless. On a conversation, with that manager visibly nervous, he bluntly told me that I was going to be responsible for that use-cases, and I will be responsabilised if the use-cases would not be validated by the QAS team. I remember looking at them with a puzzled face (or at least, it's how I felt my face's muscles) and asked: "And there's any other way to get the job done?" TL;DR: The Company had outsourced the development of the product to a company (mine), but also outsourced the QAS to a direct competitor. So it would be the best interest of that competitor to get rid of us to score the positions for their own contractors. So my direct manager's problem was that he had hired my company to the development job, and he didn't wanted to lose points on his boss if we fail on the job - what, in theory, would be our competitor's best interest and, so, writing a so detailed and specific Requirements would play against our best interest. Problem: such Requirements was still the best (if not the only) way to get the fracking job done! What follows was probably my finest hours on that Industry: I had already worked for that Company, so I knew how they think and I understood why they hired competitors for Development and Quality. TL;DR: if the project fails, BOTH OF US would be sacked, so we were all in the same boat. So my next task, after writing that document, was to talk with the QAS guys and explain to them (including their manager, that understood and agreed) that our best interest was to work together in this project, and let our respective bosses to handle politics up there in the top floor - far away from the trenches. I did everything I could to make their lives easier, and they made everything they could to make my job effective (not exactly easier however ), and we delivered the product not as specified, but better. EDIT: I want to stress the pronoun WE. I didn't saved the day, I just did my job while they did their job and together we delivered the product. Unfortunately, that project was an exception on our Customer, not the norm. That Industry had already started to crumb - in the exact same way this one is doing now. It's the reason I think the Game Industry is "over firing", not to mention firing the wrong guys. The real troublemakers depicted by this video are not the cheeks-covering developers that wanted 4 weeks for a simple task. The real culprit is the idiot that negotiated the 2 weeks. Get rid of that idiot, and the developers will just cope with the demand, or they will be punctually replaced - and problem solved. It's exactly about "seniority". Under par people were hired as "Seniors" without the merit. And these people climbed the corporate ladder and started solving technical problems with politics. Firing the people that danced with their music is not going to fix anything. You need to fire the musicians.

The Wikipedia articles on the Uranprojekt are quite enlightening: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=German_nuclear_program_during_World_War_II&diffonly=true Even more interesting are the Transkription of the talk of impridoned German scientists envolved in the Uranprojekt: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Epsilon They show that ( imho luckily) they did have quite some failure in estamting the needed amount of Uran, needed devices etc. But in the end if sonething don't work you mess around until you find sonething that works.

I think it was found out in its own time. There is a thread of talk among the sci-fi / fearful / weird crowd to the effect that 'humanity is destined to destroy itself'. The companion to this is 'the reason we don't talk to Aliens is that they've all destroyed themselves.'. Apparently (according to the line of thought) once a species acquired nukes it is inevitable that they will destroy themselves. That is probably hogwash. The '23d century tech' bit is the key: they think that somehow, magically, by the 23d century that we would be so enlightened as a species that we could handle the awesome responsibility of having such terrible weapons. If you recall your Star Trek canon, there was a terrible nuclear war, which humanity survived, and two centuries later we were bigger and better than ever. (might also be hogwash)

They. Did. Not. They moderated people who were yelling and screaming and frothing at the mouth. You've always been able to talk bad about the game and the developers. The problem comes when anybody disagrees with you and you freak out.

Saying something so condescending and negative about someone, so confidently and with such little information is absolute bananas to me. Just because some YouTube influencers did some "research" and forum members have obsessively scrutinized every pointless scrap of info doesn't mean we have any clue who's to blame. We don't know what the day to day operations were like. We don't know who was pushing for what, or who was expressing doubts. We don't know what was said at meetings. Nobody who was there can apparently talk at the moment. To publicly condemn a man and call for harm to his career based on so little, and while hiding behind a pseudonym, should be embarrassing.

Matt Lowne said, during his conversation with Harvester on the Tube, that he'd reached out to Nate and got a response saying 'I look forward to talking when I can' or something along those lines. Reading between the lines there, he can't talk right now due to some mitigating factor, no doubt a non-disclosure agreement but it sounded like he'll be able to talk sometime in the not too distant future. If there's anyone who has the full details, it's Nate.

You know, i didn't even think about FAR affecting seaplanes in that way. As for the rest, yeah i left prior to KSP2's "Launch" and then came back to talk mad **** when it went EA lol (Then left again because bored). But that's good to know. Thanks Marr! I need to do some testing now.

Yes and the M-21/D-21 incident did lead to the cancellation of these concepts. But there was a group of aerodynamicsts and Physicists who pointed out that the B-70 and the A-12/SR-70 are aerodynamically VERY different aircraft. Also the X-15 would be mounted 3x higher off the wing than the M-21/D-21 combo with Vertical fins instead of inward canted fins (which is what the D-21 actually struck first.) And lastly, The D-21 had a rudimentary Autopilot that couldn't compensate for anything (exactly how many D-21 pods were recovered.... 1!) So on the scale of tolerances; we are talking about is almost an order of a magnitude greater than the very tightly fit M-21/D-21. All that being said. Yes I agree this was risky. (Note the D-21 wingtips are almost the same width as the rudders!) Re the B-52/X-15 issue. It couldn't at all have to do with the fact they had to cut a huge NOTCH out of the B-52s wing and the eddy and vortice generated were striking the rudder directly on the X-15. B-52 was not an ideal launch platform for something the Size of the X-15. If the B-36 would have been able to fly Faster/Higher it Might have been ok. There was even talk about re-tasking one of the two YB-60s (B-36 with 8 J57s and swept wings) to carry the X-15 in the bomb bay like the B-36 did with its FICON aircraft (Which dropped away, flew their mission and then RETURNED and landed in the B-36 Bomb bay! (In theory) Note the B-60 would not actually do well because the wing was so thick (it was just a B-36 wing with a new center section that gave it a 35 degree sweep) that the B-60 could barely fly once it actually flew and it's handling was... in a word... atrocious. Look how thick the wing is! It is still the worlds largest (in size) all jet bomber aircraft in the world. The Bomb-bay, when equipped with cutouts for the wings, could hold an X-15 similar to how Maestro carried the X-1 and X-2s. I actually know one of the Engineers who flew on Maestro for some of those fascinating X-plane flights. BTW Said engineer was scheduled to fly on the X-1-3 flight under the B-50 mother-ship (I don't remember that one's name now) At the end of the flight (they did not drop the X-1) they were de-fuling the X-1 when the plane exploded. The F-84 there is roughly 4/5ths the size fuselage to fuselage of an X-15. In the Case of the FICON the tail goes into the bomb-bay.

Do not use post it notes to talk on the web.

Musk has always been a manipulating idiot who's failed upwards getting a bigger pile of cash. He's never been actually good, just good at corporate manipulation and control and selling himself as doing things he never did. He's always bought into corporations and manipulated his way to control--sometimes failing and getting fired. Along the way, Musk gathered a cult following who just think he's the best thing since sliced bread. He may have slowly grown to believe his own propaganda, maybe. Careful examination of Musk has always shown this. However, when he played silly buggers with Twitter and got caught in a deal to buy it--which the Twitter Board held him to--Musk got forced to buy Twitter. And now has demonstrated no matter how bad Twitter was before Musk, it was a paradise compared to how it is now. Showing how bad his decisions are about an actual tech company has really shown to more that Musk isn't a genius but an idiot. But I think it's likely his long pile of promises for Tesla will be what sinks him. It will eventually become like Enron but even bigger. How long this will take to play out and how is unknown. But despite Musk convincing first his tame Tesla Board of Directors and then the Shareholders, there's no true justification for him being paid US $45 billion for what he has done. That's a massive share of the profit for every vehicle that Tesla has sold. When its latest vehicle, the Cybertruck, is a horrible design--demanded by Musk--and a complete failure. They and other sane investors likely voted against Musk's bonus. But he apparently convinced enough of the Shareholders to get that past. There was a "fear" that Musk would quit as CEO if he didn't get his massive bonus. There's some crazy talk about Musk being vital for the success of Tesla. HOW?!? He's the one destroying it. And the value of Tesla Stock went up after the vote was announced. Stock Market Investors can be quite stupid in the short run. However, when real sales and finance figures come out and it's more and rising failure, things will get rebalanced. When this will catch up to Musk, not sure. But I think it will eventually.

We don't really need to make up any announcements. The official KSP X feed said it best: We are continuing to support, and we will talk when we can. That's about the best you are ever going to get.

There probably is some limitation on how much they could talk about. I recall a feature video, can't remember which one, where Nate mentioned an interstellar(?) engine. He described it as pure white light. Nothing more. Some engines (for metallic hydrogen) were featured, while others were hidden. Why? Probably they have some sort of information they need to hide. Can't tell without seeing the NDA. However, these last two months... well, they speak for themselves.

Granted. The bottle opener can not only talk, but can automatically identify and open bottles. Unfortunately it thinks you're a bottle and "opens" you (i.e. removes your head). I wish for nothing in particular.

Just because it was cleared to talk about certain aspects of Rask and Rusk does not mean all of Rask and Rusk are immune to NDA. [snip]

And they had talked about Rask & Rust, meaning it wasn't covered under NDA. We don't know if the "solution to the Rask & Rusk problem" was covered under an NDA either so I don't see the point in this NDA talk. Signing a paper that allows higher ups to scam people is a moral failure, I don't care what spin anyone puts on it.

Has been a while since I commented on my own post but I hope that people continue to talk on this post.

They get cancelled quickly because of corporate greed. I wish for one of those lost 2003 bottle openers that talk

Not necessarily. Do you know the Enigma encoder machine from Germany used during WWII? Someone coded it in VB6, creating the machine application where you pressed buttons. At the same time, he released the source code. Various applications could be developed by reusing the code already written on the rotors and pegboard. An interesting application is that you typed the message, pressed a button, it was encoded with the Enigma and it was passed to Morse effortlessly. And vice versa. That is why I do not think we have to start from scratch, but we have to access what has already been written and talk to those who participated. Documentation is very important, whether written or transmitted verbally.

Vanamonde-stradamus @Dakota and @Nerdy_Mike are also under NDA's, which are probably stricter than what the mods here have signed. And I really do believe that if any of them knew anything AND that if they could talk, they would have already. Very well said, especially the part about other hobbies. I've long put off trying to learn how to play lead guitar, and I have the time to do so. I mean, I had the time when I was playing KSP1, KSP2, Juno, NHL 20, Madden 18...you get the point.

There's a very strong selection bias in these. Worth looking into, but without a metastudy, all you really have is that climate has changed in places that had wind turbines and solar panels built. It also changed in most places where it hasn't. We're kind of going through a major climate shift. That's the reason we're looking into alternative energy sources, remember? And there is absolutely nothing establishing a connection between the change and the infrastructure. You'd have to study hundreds of sites with and without infrastructure change to even pick up the connection when the averages have shifted so much over just a few years. And yeah, the bias in the Russian article is obvious. Yeah, huge "citation needed," on this one. Windmills can certainly cause the moisture to fall out as a rain. Any obstruction to the air does. Forests, famously. Except, it's deforestation that leads to desertification and not the other way around. The law of conservation of matter, that this paragraph refers to, precisely tells you that if the windmill made the air drier, that moisture ended up somewhere. It ended up as fog and clouds behind the windmill, resulting in rainfall on the terrain. That might have been rainfall that didn't happen somewhere else, but it certainly hasn't resulted in less moisture reaching the ground on the net. If anything, the dryer air will promote more evaporation over the bodies of water, resulting in even more rainfall. Again, see forests and differences in rainfall over plains vs mountainous/hilly terrain. Rapid temperature increases we're seeing due to the CO2 emissions, in contrast, have been linked to a lot of areas getting drier weather. Also to some absolute monsoons in other areas, whether or not they installed wind farms. And you want the real kicker? Take a look at CO2 concentrations over Europe, and compare them to the maps shown in the article. Heck, some of these are precisely mapping to the coal emissions from the Germany's increase in coal burn after the nuclear power plants were shut down. The author's just another pseudo-intellectual unwittingly picking up the lines from European coal industry. Unsurprising, really, given which news sources that industry backs in Europe, and the political climate in Russia. It's shockingly easy to lie to people with no media literacy using charts. And yes, the author does talk about nuclear energy. And so do the German coal firms. In the key of, "Oh, yes, it would have been better to keep the NPPs running, but who knew? Now we have no choice but to mine more coal." Germany screwed up big time. But pinning the climate impact caused by resulting coal emissions increase on wind farms is not going to make things better. Rightly so.

You guys are just as mixed up in all of this as us, so of course it's no slight toward the mods, bug hunters, et cetera. More towards Take Two Interactive, the problem is it will go unanswered. There's few things worse than purgatory, for better or for worse it's time for someone to talk about it. I suppose once the WARN deadline passes, the end of this month, the likes of Nate, Nertea, et cetera are free to actually talk about it. It's a shame because if there's one thing I could and would never accuse Nate of being, and that's not absolutely enthusiastic about 'the work'. The dude seems like he genuinely loves the concept, the Kerbal way, to the extent that he kinda angered the community a bit with their decision to have wobbly rockets. But yeah!

Well... I have been trucking on in the game with the challenges + extra steps I put upon myself. But I must admit that a driving factor for me last year was the encouragement from the forum. As of now its actually not the state of the game that kills lust to play.. its the despair of the community. I think its even worse on the official discord.. I feel the KSP2 general chat only talks about substitute games for KSP2.. and when ever I post something I did in game.. no one seems to care. I know that this can come off as very self centered.. or like: If it come across as that - it is not my point... my point is, that when ever the game got tough it was the encouragement, suggestions and feedback from the community that got me going.. And none of my other acquaintances care enough about space travel to understand it when I talk about what I am doing in the game. So what I am really saying is.. I miss the community. I have decided that once Im dont with my current mission report - ill stop playing KSP until further notice.

Is there anything in particular you're hoping to achieve by being a troll that actually comes out and says "Hey guys! I'm a troll!" I mean, It defeats the whole purpose... And if we read the bit you quoted... "someone you believe is a troll" vs "someone who is a troll" Couple of things wrong with what you said here. First, you are the one that keeps shifting the goal posts and burden of proof. I've asked you pointedly and directly what proof you have to show that the game cannot be fixed, and you have yet to answer the question. In this latest example, you try to dodge the question by stating that neither I nor Lisias have proof that it can be fixed...and then state that Lisias has provided some explanation that you believe is hear-say. Secondly, I'd like to challenge you to go find where I stated that the game can be fixed. In fact, I'll even point out something I said in this thread as a direct response to you: So you either read what I wrote here and completely ignored it, or you glossed over my post and failed to see it. Either way, you are wrong when you say that I am saying it is fixable, primarily because I never said that. Go ahead and look through my posts in this thread; I've got all day. This assumes I'm not reading your posts, but rather just spamming the thread. Neither of which is true, because I am in fact reading your posts, and I'm responding to them directly. Copy/Paste only works when you aren't interested in actually talking. The big issue here is that you haven't even defined what you mean by "not fixable". I could make the assumption that you are talking about modding the game and not the actual code...but that doesn't seem right. Mods may make it appear that the game is fixed, but no, the underlying code is the problem as that still has issues for anyone who hasn't used the same mods someone else has. So let's assume, then, that you are talking about the underlying game code itself and attack this conversation from there. Are you a programmer? Have you had the chance to actually look at the underlying code and analyze it to the point where you can say with 100% certainty that it cannot be altered so as to make the game "fixed"? Have you had in-depth conversations with the actual developers on this topic, and if so, can you share those insights with us? My final guess here is that you don't even know what you mean when you talk about the game being "fixed", nor do you have an idea of what state the game would need to be in to be considered as "fixed". I think you simply have had bad experiences with bugs and just assume the game isn't fixable. Not that you've tried, of course; why else would you continue to not answer the question, other than to protect your own narrow viewpoint? I'll retract my claim as soon as you show me a build of the game that loads in a few seconds, can handle thousands of parts without turning into a slideshow, and doesn't implode if a Kerbal ragdolls in just the right way.