511–520 of 926 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can confirm this was the greatest thing I've ever witnessed in my life. https://youtu.be/AGPH_i0ZlyM?t=56
There's something awesome (in the literal sense) and unsettling about watching something and being able to say "I am witnessing history".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I get a headache watching Star Wars like sci-fi where everything is manually controlled by the pilot. How did sci-fi get so disconnected from the actual future?
Star Wars takes place in the distant past, not in the future. Also, 2001: A Space Odyssey is a great movie about a great example why you do not pilot your ships with computers all the time. Also, you do not know what the future holds. You are living in the present, not the future, where we very well may have pilots piloting ships. Star Wars is not science fiction and it does not take place in the future. We are not l…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think a good-faith reading of the parent commentary is that he was talking about the mannerisms and language and overall appearance of the person, not that he was white-skinned and a man. Immediately assuming he was saying he looks like an engineer because he isn't a women, or dark-skinned, is ironically a racist and sexist assumption.
No, recognizing the existence of sexist and racist stereotypes is not the same as being sexist and racist. Even if one incorrectly assumes that someone holds such stereotypical views.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's something awesome (in the literal sense) and unsettling about watching something and being able to say "I am witnessing history".
It's not quite our generation's "one small step for Man" moment (I'm saving that for when we actually land a human on Mars) but it's damn close.
Nevertheless :) FH first launch is an impressive feat.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand, there are indeed many scientists/engineers who look/act "nerdy" or don't have the suaveness of people we typically see on TV. I think what GP is saying is that typically companies will put forward people who are good-looking and charismatic for PR, so it's nice to see someone different and unpolished be center-stage in the public eye.
Why exactly is “good looking and charismatic” a bad thing? To be a good host you need to (should) be charismatic, that’s literally the job.
I guess it depends if you're looking more for entertainment or information.
I. Am. Just. Speechless. Perfect takeoff, 2 simultaneous landings (still waiting for confirmation on the droneship landing), the car is in orbit. I don't remember being so nervous watching a launch video since... Space Shuttle missions, I think. Great job, SpaceX!
Watching the car orbit and the Earth's reflections in the windshield and paint and Starman's visor is sublime (sometimes goes to cameras of the engine/orbit overview) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBr2kKAHN6M e.g. https://i.imgur.com/Yu6gRar.jpg This is all I'm watching for the rest of the day https://imgur.com/oKWTAQk
Might I suggest pairing it with Pink Floyd's _Echoes_[0]?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They just happen to be younger, or women, or of color. Maybe parent was referring to their mannerisms, rather than their appearance. It's not fair to jump to the assumption that parent was showing a bias against any of those variations in the human species.
To be pedantic, the poster did say "looks like" and: - "looks like" is associated with physical appearance - possibly things like clothes, jewelry, gender, hair, skin color, face, etc. - "sounds like" is associated with their speech - tone, accent, choice of diction - "acts like" is associated with physical behavior + speech But anyway, I think the point is that, we don't know what mabbo's intent was and 95% likely i…
The phrase "looks like" is commonly used as short hand for "seems like", "feels like", "gives the impression of", etc. It would be the same as if someone said they "appeared to be" professional actors, that doesn't necessarily indicate that it's based on visual cues.
Seems like bad form to assign malice to someone based on a likely misinterpretation of their comments, then accuse them of racism and sexism.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
ADVERTISING. The amount of coverage both Tesla & SpaceX got from launching the Roadster equates to advertising costing considerably more than the cost of the car.
You’ve got to launch something. I’m sure you could launch an equally heavy concrete block to prove you can but... what’s the fun in that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Star Wars takes place in the distant past, not in the future. Also, 2001: A Space Odyssey is a great movie about a great example why you do not pilot your ships with computers all the time. Also, you do not know what the future holds. You are living in the present, not the future, where we very well may have pilots piloting ships. Star Wars is not science fiction and it does not take place in the future. We are not l…
Isn't the key part of Sci-fi that it contains a society that has in some way advanced beyond our own? Saying it's not sci-fi because the fictional advance is set in our past (but at a development technologically beyond our own) seems quite a strange distinction.
I didn't say that at all. It is in the past, and also, it is not science fiction. Star Wars is quite fantasy, offering no explanation in science for the force, hyperspace, lightsabers, etc.
I love Star Wars with all my heart. But it is not about the future and it is not science fiction. It takes place "a long time ago" and it centers around magical, unexplained powers.
Edit:
And,
> Isn't the key part of Sci-fi that it contains a society that has in some way advanced beyond our own?
No, I don't agree with this at all. I would even say that in nearly all science fiction published, the societies have not advanced beyond our own that much - or if they have, they are also demonstrated to be far behind us in other ways. Science fiction is a lot of things, but certainly there is no requirement for it to show a more advanced society than ours.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe the person was comparing the engineer to his model of a TV star rather than comparing his model of the engineer to the other 'tv looking ones'. "Sorry to call you out on this" but this person is clearly giving an opinion and this type of reactionary statement reads as defensive due to you expressing some type of negativity due to the structure of this persons opinion. You might want to re-evaluate what your…
If this hedges and mild way of pointing out implicit bias is a "hammer", then what exactly do you think is polite enough?
I interpreted the parents comment as a joke more about the engineer not looking like a TV star than the others not looking like an engineer by the way...
So to close this comment, CANT ENGINEERS LOOK LIKE TV STARS TOO?? to which I will respond and say 'not always'. Maybe that's a way to respond politely to implicit bias...