441–450 of 458 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In Italian divertente is entertaining. Parent probably speaks a Romance language and got hit by a "false friend".
That's actually a valid (of old fashioned) usage in English too, it's just a bit weird to value in a voice assistant for your car.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's actually a valid (of old fashioned) usage in English too, it's just a bit weird to value in a voice assistant for your car.
I have it set to the "Gork" personality, which is occasionally correct and useful, but is very often genuinely funny. It's like a Spicoli-with-a-PhD that answers your query when it "feels like it".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have it set to the "Gork" personality, which is occasionally correct and useful, but is very often genuinely funny. It's like a Spicoli-with-a-PhD that answers your query when it "feels like it".
I have a RULES file for my coding agent which I invoke when I get bored. It basically simulates a real office environment saying things like "while the queue is full our worker is sitting in the corner with its thumb up its ass looking at the wrong queue".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Only downsides are .... Yeah the only downsides are those you listed, and about 1000 others. Anybody that is serious about data centers on the moon should have their brain examined.
IMO, they're bad, but not so bad as "have their brain examined". While they absolutely do have huge problems at current costs, and I don't trust Musk's estimates for future costs. It's not implausible that collectively humanity (well, China: it's not like the ESA appears to value cheap launches yet) is going to get launch costs down a lot further, something that makes the question of "how cheap is cheap enough?" wort…
Even if you assume launch cost = zero its most expensive and less practical.
And the moon is even worse. Still you can assume launch cost = zero. But energy is one part, to actually reliably land on the moon with your whole infrastructure. Connecting all that infrastucture up with power and everything else.
Your basically doing a gigantic civil engineering project all with only roboitcs, while we can't even do a civil engineering project on earths with only robots.
And if your going moon, nuclear is clearly the better option then solar towers. And if you go nuclear anyway, just do it on earth.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IMO, they're bad, but not so bad as "have their brain examined". While they absolutely do have huge problems at current costs, and I don't trust Musk's estimates for future costs. It's not implausible that collectively humanity (well, China: it's not like the ESA appears to value cheap launches yet) is going to get launch costs down a lot further, something that makes the question of "how cheap is cheap enough?" wort…
10x is very very optimistic. Practically it would be more. Even if you assume launch cost = zero its most expensive and less practical. And the moon is even worse. Still you can assume launch cost = zero. But energy is one part, to actually reliably land on the moon with your whole infrastructure. Connecting all that infrastucture up with power and everything else. Your basically doing a gigantic civil engineering pr…
The other stuff… well, I think it's worth the analysis, even when the answer ends up not just "no", but "hell no!".
Analysis is much cheaper than actually going to space, after all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You say this like the average age and reliability of cars hasn't been skyrocketing for years. Toyota offers a 10-year warranty on new cars, which would have been unthinkable 20 years ago. You can't update the infotainment, but the engine controls have remained modular because it's simply too hard to convince people to buy truly unrepairable cars. Tesla did it, and once people realized that gently tapping a Model 3 wa…
My mother drives a 12 year old car. If you don't use it much and have a parking garage cars are pretty much indestructible.
2006 Tacoma's are selling for like $5k less than their original MSRP!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Only downsides are .... Yeah the only downsides are those you listed, and about 1000 others. Anybody that is serious about data centers on the moon should have their brain examined.
IMO, they're bad, but not so bad as "have their brain examined". While they absolutely do have huge problems at current costs, and I don't trust Musk's estimates for future costs. It's not implausible that collectively humanity (well, China: it's not like the ESA appears to value cheap launches yet) is going to get launch costs down a lot further, something that makes the question of "how cheap is cheap enough?" wort…
> Even if the answer turns out to still be 10x more expensive than the ground
Using Musk's optimistic numbers, to put things into LEO, it is >$1k/kg for single reuse, ~$100/kg with ~5 reuses, and
> I'd suggest sending up 1000 km of HVDC cable
I'll let you do the math on that one, because that stuff is not light weight... We're talking several kg/m minimum... Then consider payload...
You're being pretty cavalier about all the hard things... You can't just hand wave away these details because these "details" are just a fraction of what makes all of this so difficult.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
10x is very very optimistic. Practically it would be more. Even if you assume launch cost = zero its most expensive and less practical. And the moon is even worse. Still you can assume launch cost = zero. But energy is one part, to actually reliably land on the moon with your whole infrastructure. Connecting all that infrastucture up with power and everything else. Your basically doing a gigantic civil engineering pr…
I basically agree with you. Even where I said 10x, because I am indeed an optimistic person. The other stuff… well, I think it's worth the analysis, even when the answer ends up not just "no", but "hell no!". Analysis is much cheaper than actually going to space, after all.
Look, I'd love to do more things in space, but we'll never be able to do them if we lie our way and aren't realistic at the costs, and benefits. It just creates strawmen that are trivial to tear down. The armchair experts aren't helping, they're hurting.
Amazing that Tesla announced the next generation roadster and sold pre-orders which I think cost $100k and then just never released it and there seems to be no indication (last I checked) that it ever will be.
Yesterday on the earnings call Elon said the reveal is in April “hopefully”.