561–570 of 926 posts
What's the difference in how SpaceX is run vs Musk's other companies? It seems to succeed doing the hardest things whereas the others have struggled to meet their goals. Would Musk focusing only on it make any difference? edit: This is not a complaint, just a question, why the downvotes? I'm used to getting downvoted for no reason, but this is basic a question, with great answers. Come on HN! We can't ask questions?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for the closure - I've been refreshing twitter all morning. I've seen the much-touted $90M price-tag for the FH launch, but does that take into account loss of the core or boosters?
I think he said in the press conference that they weren't planning to reuse the core or boosters. (But then mentioned later they wanted some of the parts? IDK)
They are however interested in recovering the grid fins on the side boosters, which were redesigned to accommodate for the nose cones now sitting on top of them.
At approx t-minus four minutes and counting. Elon Musk tweeted the "Holy Mouse Click" had returned "true". That moment when control is transferred to the onboard modules. And the Autonomous Flight Safety System takes control.
Its truly awesome to see that silky smooth burn. that perfect parabolic arc. And think upon the twenty-seven Merlin engines all firing in synchrony. Equipped with an intelligent decision making capability. And what the implications might be for future human spaceflight.
Here is an ancient link. But back around the mid-noughties. NASA published some details on the architecture of an AFSS:
An Autonomous Flight Safety System
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/200800...
Considering the Falcon Heavy includes reusable side boosters and central shaft. The complexity multiplies. As an example, take a peek at an implementation for expendable missions. that still use ground or satellite tracking and control.
Range Safety Algorithm Software Module for an Autonomous Flight Safety System
https://software.nasa.gov/software/GSC-15594-1
Darpa contributed tool for low level verification of onboard AFSS software.
SeaHorn: A fully automated analysis framework for LLVM-based languages
And of course, once your computers make it into space. They will need a place to store all the mountains of data generated ;)
SpaceBelt: space-based cloud storage network
It's such a shame that so many people with Elon kind of money aren't doing anything to transform us into a spacefaring species. Why doesn't apple have a mars program? What the fuck are people doing with all the money? Awesome work by spacex. They are peerless, except if you want to count massive superpower governments as peers.
If you wonder why all of the shareholders of Apple aren't plowing their money into spaceflight, well it's probably because they're a retirement fund, or just aren't rich.
Other people invest in making this world a better place, see Bill Gates, or other worthwhile causes, of which spaceflight is just one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The feed quality drops in a way that makes the shaking antennae explanation seem plausible. I doubt the announcers knew then (why not just say so unless there was some ambiguity?), but it must have been a distinct concern, hence their 'smile nervously' reaction. It is a bit odd they haven't announced that it was lost yet, but I agree that seems very likely.
FWIW the drone ship feed has been lost in exactly the same way every time I’ve watched a landing.
Also in the video if you watch mission control’s wall of monitors you can see the feed cut back with an empty drone ship a minute or so later. Seems to confirm that the rocket missed the deck due to the engines not lighting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
We should also welcome pointing about the stupidity in assuming things always boil down to race/gender/sexual orientation. It should be obvious that aesthetic stereotypes go far beyond race and gender. Here's 2 very stereotypically different white guys: http://ricerfiles.gizmore.org/images/20160629/28030-human-ha... and this: https://i1.adis.ws/i/Superdry_com/NS_MP_Hoodies_hb_right?qlt... But to some people, they onl…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're showing your biases here. The other people on the livestream are also rocket scientists. They aren't PR people. They just happen to be younger, or women, or of color. So you might want to re-evaluate what you think a rocket scientist "looks like", because your notion is outdated. Sorry to call you out like this, but these kinds of prejudices about who is the "correct" kind of person for tech jobs are harmful a…
Is this not alike to asking me to not have the mental view of a basketball team as a coloured group of tall males? And if I had that view, then am I discriminating against short white people, or have I built a more accurate mental model of the world?
Discrimination is an effect. Bias may cause discrimination, but bias in itself is not malicious.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're showing your biases here. The other people on the livestream are also rocket scientists. They aren't PR people. They just happen to be younger, or women, or of color. So you might want to re-evaluate what you think a rocket scientist "looks like", because your notion is outdated. Sorry to call you out like this, but these kinds of prejudices about who is the "correct" kind of person for tech jobs are harmful a…
You made an incorrect assumption based on bad logic. The parent didn't say they didn't look like rocket scientists, he/she said that they could pass as PR people, regardless of whether or not they were rocket scientists. Let me phrase it a different and rude (sorry) way. "You know they're including real engineers because there is at least one person in the spotlight that would never be employed by a PR firm."
That's exactly what the parent said. Let me quote it for you:
> He doesn't look like a TV star, he looks like an engineer, a rocket scientist. He looks real.
The implication being that the other hosts looked fake, not like engineers or rocket scientists but like PR people.
I think you're being overly charitable here, but even if you're right and your interpretation is correct, the original phrasing lends itself towards a worse interpretation that many other people (including me) picked up on. Precise communication is especially important around areas that are problematic for tech like diversity in our workforce, so if he had meant to compliment the rocket scientists on their poise he should have said exactly that, not implying that they don't look real (unlike the older white guy who fits all the stereotypes of being a rocket scientist).
Love that SpaceX’s own team shoots, announces, and switches the live production in-house rather than hiring a production company. Also love seeing machinists side by side cheering with software engineers, standing by a mission control which is placed feet from where engines are assembled on the shop floor. Open company culture well-executed. Congratulations to all there!
This is why I love the live streams hosted by John Innsprucker. He doesn't look like a TV star, he looks like an engineer, a rocket scientist. He looks real. The other hosts are great, but if you told me they were hired actors or PR people I'd believe it.
It also does not mean people will actually change in such a way that they won't think someone 'looks like an engineer' or 'looks live a TV star', they just won't say it out loud. Instead they'll say it among friends they know they can trust, more vehemently than they'd have done if this type of speech were not taboo.
I can only hope that the hyper-sensitivity currently found in the public sphere will pass when enough people from enough parts of society speak up against it. If it doesn't we're in for troubled times as it touches something which lies at the core of the enlightened western society, freedom of speech and expression. Those are precious things, too precious to squander.
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…
> 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. No, it merely illustrates why you want your AI properly bottled up and airgapped that way the flight computer will follow your instructions after you consult with the AI (assuming an AI is ever built...). Computers can control spacecraft just fine in the present without AI so really there…
Instead of a daemon, call it a djinn?