No? It seemed like it was written by a space nerd that was mesmerized by the footage and what it represented. Which is the right reaction to that.
Didn't seem like an LLM to me, despite reading it after seeing your comment and looking out for that.
That said, LLM style depends on prompt etc., so I can easily believe it's the style you personally get when you prompt an LLM.
Perhaps because of the earnestness? It would be a shame if that were to become AI-coded.
It compared video footage to “sci fI”.
I kind of feel like the footage of OSIRIS sucker punching an asteroid was significantly more impressive. Not the least because that was capturing a critical moment of successful mission. The sycophantic writing of this article was over the top.
Have you seen said video footage?
Autonomous rocket landing on an autonomous ship. It was pretty incredible
…and that’s more impressive than OSIRIS because…
For one, it’s a significantly more difficult engineering challenge. Two, it’s unprecedented. OSIRIS was cinematically more dramatic, but we’ve been hitting moving things with moving things for a while. We haven’t done a mechalox reusable massive spaceship before to the point that it’s basically its own category.
Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t find landing a rocket to be terribly impressive. Especially when it’s literally the least critical feature. We can do successful missions without the still very questionable reusable aspects of this extremely late and extremely questionable system.
In the same way as your post feels written by AI
It's turtles all the way down.
/jk
At least 80% of all articles online are written by AI these days.
*citation needed.
"93% of statistics on the internet are just made up." -- Abraham Lincoln