Nightfox

@TheCSSSkeptic @C_S_Skeptic Guess we gotta give him some credit. He's realized he was wrong and is trying to get out of it (even if he won't admit it). Unlike Thunderfoot, that guy's doubling down and it's a trainwreck.

The unthinkable might have happened @C_S_Skeptic might have given up talking about SpaceX and starship He has said basically nothing about it since Flight 5. It’s mainly Andrew Tate nonsense. He only goes after those he envies, it makes sense. Good riddance CSS

@robishungry @Jaxxn27 @thunderf00t If you want to compare short flights, what about SLS? Oh sorry you don't want to talk about that because it doesn't fit your "SpaceX bad" narrative.

NASA landed a Nuclear Powered Rover on Mars BRISTLING with scientific instruments for $2.5bn Musk spent MUCH more TAXPAYER money than this on starship and thus far has only delivered a single booster catch! youtube.com/watch?v=T4UKr7…

@thunderf00t But SLS is already at 12B and counting with no results to speak of. "But no don't compare Starship and SLS that doesn't fit my narrative."

@YottaMindset @thunderf00t Everything that booster did was pinpoint, intentional and deliberate. It went off exactly as intended. In what way did it "almost destroy the whole tower"?

@thunderf00t That booster catcher also was pretty dicey and almost destroyed the whole tower.

Spacex took a contract for 3bn dollars of tax payer money -to deliver the human landing system. Spacex has had 3 billion dollars of tax payer money -delivered a single booster catch. Spacex fans.... YAHHHHH BURN MORE TAXPYER CASH!!!!! THUNDERF00T CAREER IS OVER!!!

@wasatch_wind @Orbital_Perigee Since they only receive that 3b broken up over increments AFTER they achieve specific milestones set by NASA, Starship is almost entirely funded by starlink and actually entirely funding by SpaceX itself.

@Orbital_Perigee The man also doesn't seem to realize that SpaceX is spending a significant portion of their own Starlink profits on this.

it’s so funny to see how many more launches we can divide over these three billion. when we get to the end and they deliver all of it do we get to be like “wow all these flights cost 3 billion”

@random_innit929 @thunderf00t *crickets*

@thunderf00t Or they'll magically just stop at some point? I don't mean this to be a gotcha. Genuinely what is your internal thought process on this

@thunderf00t The plan from SpaceX for Artemis is a derivitive work BASED on starship, but they're going to develop starship anyway regardless. This project does NOT involve taxpayer money.

@thunderf00t First of all SpaceX has been funding the Starship project itself. Just because they won a contract for 3B for a lunar lander doesn't mean they've used it. Ntm BO and ULA have much less to show for it with a higher pricetag, but I don't see you talking about them.

@kpo1978 @thunderf00t So they just randomly decided to start numbering the Apollo program at 11? Weird.

@GoodwinHig30984 @thunderf00t SpaceX caught a booster as a proof of concept for rapid reusability paving the way for far cheaper access to space in the future. - 3B in funding from NASA SLS has done... nothing. Nothing but failures. - 6B+ in funding from NASA. But no SpaceX is definitely the problem yup.

@thunderf00t Isn’t SLS like 6 billion dollars over budget?

@ThomasFrankowsk @DKiSAerospace 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️ Indeed

@DKiSAerospace 🤦‍♂️

@DKiSAerospace @Orbital_Perigee I'd like to ask him and CSS how that crow tastes.

Thousands of distinct vehicle and pad criteria had to be met prior to catching the Super Heavy booster. Thanks to the tireless work of SpaceX engineers, we succeeded with catch on our first attempt.

@Elonmuskjuni @engineers_feed Its not about the beginning state. Its about the goal state. How much liquid do you want the glass to contain?

@engineers_feed What if you aren't aware of the beginning state?

Ok people let’s end this argument once and for all: A glass is half full if it was initially empty. A glass is half empty if it was initially full.

@BathroomExpense @engineers_feed I would argue it's not about the initial state, but about the propsed goal state. Do you intend to drink it and want to know if it's enough to quench your thirst? Half empty. Is it your intent to fill it and you need to know how much more liquid you need? Half full.

@engineers_feed And if its previous state is unknown or not within context, it is both at the same time.

@engineers_feed Finally someone who gets it! I've been saying this for ages. Glass half empty or glass half full is ridiculous. It comes down to your goal, not what kind of person you are.

@Hobopoyo 基本的に木だね

japanese kanji quiz time🌳✨ which of these kanji means “tree”? a. 木 (ki) b. 本 (hon) #japanesequiz #kanjiquiz

@JohnJackHobday @steph_bernard69 @engineers_feed The line cutting the square in halfs goes from (0,0) to the (1,1) and the other line goes from (1/2,1) to (1,0). If we find y for both lines we get: y=x and y=-2x+2 Find where these x values are equal and we get the intersect point x = -2x+2 x-2=-2x -2=-2x-x -2=-3x 2=3x x=2/3

@steph_bernard69 @engineers_feed This looks about right but how do you establish the 2/3 line is 2/3?

Mathematical puzzle.

@SebKowalke @engineers_feed Yeah this is exactly the sort of problem that chatgpt struggles with. I think because it's logic is based on the statistical and semantic connection of lexical tokens it has trouble with spacial and constraint based reasoning.

@engineers_feed Some of these ChatGPT answers here in the replies... 🤣 Clearly the top middle is the 2 of diamonds.

♦️ The two through ten of diamonds are arranged in a magic square and then some of the cards are turned face down in their place. Which face down card is the two of diamonds?