edit: has been fixed, thanks hn
This title is incorrect and should be fixed. The actual title is "Corrected identification of object about to hit the moon" since the object has not been positively identified by anybody.
Corrected identification of object about to hit the moon
31–40 of 62 posts
Re: Corrected identification of object about to hit the moon
#32edit: has been fixed, thanks hn This title is incorrect and should be fixed. The actual title is "Corrected identification of object about to hit the moon" since the object has not been positively identified by anybody.
How can a non-existant identification be corrected?
Re: Corrected identification of object about to hit the moon
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're not making anyone mad, you're probably not doing anything important.
That is not a Dutch saying. In the Netherlands, there are literally rap songs extolling the virtues of Normal.
Interesting, I would love to hear more and/or read the lyrics!
Re: Corrected identification of object about to hit the moon
#34edit: has been fixed, thanks hn This title is incorrect and should be fixed. The actual title is "Corrected identification of object about to hit the moon" since the object has not been positively identified by anybody.
How can a non-existant identification be corrected?
The title here says "Object about to hit moon is from Chang'e 5, not SpaceX", the article says it is still not confirmed, and is just a best-guess.
The actual article title is, "Corrected identification of object about to hit the moon" - HN often fixes titles that have been paraphrased or inferred, like here.
Re: Corrected identification of object about to hit the moon
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given what follows the second quote, it appears to be a simple typo: "It was unclear..." would better fit. Also given what follows, the author seems justified in writing that first quote, which follows the presentation of the reasoning suggesting that it is the Chang'e 5-T1 mission's booster.
edited: I should have included more context to the second quote. My point being, the one who misidentified it on the first first round due to circumstantial evidence, still is not sure and is basing this new claim on also circumstantial evidence. After that last quote, they go on to say, "If we assume" , which is just a sign they are searching for a fit.
It is better circumstantial evidence, and, for reasons given in the article, it is unlikely that anything definitive will be found, at least unless the debris are examined in situ.
To say you should have included more context is something of an understatement. By removing the information between the two quotes and swapping them around, you removed all the context needed to come to a reasonable conclusion.
Re: Corrected identification of object about to hit the moon
#36I dunno man, if Elon is willing to pay someone a small stack of cash to take down their Twitter account tracking his private jet, surely he'd be willing to pay astronomers to change their story
/s
Re: Corrected identification of object about to hit the moon
#37It’s quite surprising how little verification went into the original claim that it was a falcon 9 before the outpouring of standard anti-Elon driven outrage.
I didn't participate in any outrage (actually, I'm behind here, this post was the first I'd heard of this story), but this seems like a particularly uncharitable take. The story came from an otherwise-reputable source that made a mistake. Your average person (including even most space enthusiasts) doesn't have the knowledge and expertise to check it themselves other than seeing what other astronomers have to say, and…
Elon Musk fanboys always start a fight with "I don't understand why [entity] is so dismissive of [Elon Musk's project]" line, which fixate the view and prime the flamewar. Don't feed them.
Re: Corrected identification of object about to hit the moon
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is not a Dutch saying. In the Netherlands, there are literally rap songs extolling the virtues of Normal.
Interesting, I would love to hear more and/or read the lyrics!
Dutch culture favors blending in vs standing out. Another saying - japanese I think, that comes to mind, is "the nail that sticks out gets the hammer". I was sure there was a softer dutch version about "the tallest flower gets the snip" or something but I can't find a reference :)
I feel that this is not the same spirit as 'high trees catch a lot of wind' though, that one in particular is about how famous/important people will receive a lot of criticism, and does not refer to the 'be normal' attitude.
Re: Corrected identification of object about to hit the moon
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
How can a non-existant identification be corrected?
The title here says "Object about to hit moon is from Chang'e 5, not SpaceX", the article says it is still not confirmed, and is just a best-guess. The actual article title is, "Corrected identification of object about to hit the moon" - HN often fixes titles that have been paraphrased or inferred, like here.
Ah gotcha!
Re: Corrected identification of object about to hit the moon
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
edited: I should have included more context to the second quote. My point being, the one who misidentified it on the first first round due to circumstantial evidence, still is not sure and is basing this new claim on also circumstantial evidence. After that last quote, they go on to say, "If we assume" , which is just a sign they are searching for a fit.
It is better circumstantial evidence, and, for reasons given in the article, it is unlikely that anything definitive will be found, at least unless the debris are examined in situ. To say you should have included more context is something of an understatement. By removing the information between the two quotes and swapping them around, you removed all the context needed to come to a reasonable conclusion.
In retrospect I should have been more careful the order, as well as context, although I expect those commenting to have read the article too, and the full quote would have be far too long to be included, imho.
(edit)