jccooper

There's not much older than the Vasa that is essentially intact. The Vasa is in good enough shape to have been recovered as a ship, and not as a shipwreck or an archaeological dig, which is pretty remarkable. I think there's one Ottoman galley a bit older that's been continuously maintained, and that's about it.

> The Mycenaean palaces had developed a syllabic script, which we call Linear B, to represent their spoken Greek. This form of writing is entirely lost. In the 8th century, the Greeks will adopt an entirely new script – borrowing the one the Phoenicians are using – to represent their language

You've misread something. Linear B encoded Greek, but is not related to the Phoenician-based script.

Crew Dragon flew an automated demo flight before flying with crew. It was proceeded by 20 flights of Dragon 1 over 10 years.

Starship's heatshield has already been tested full-up half a dozen times. Many changes have been made as a result.

Belgian glasses, like wine glasses, leave room for head and aromatics.

Belgium is also fanatical about matching the glass with the beer, and Europe has the very sensible pour line on glasses, so it is designed for a certain fill and filled to the design.

It's designed for experience, not volume.

I don't see that Google cares much about backlinks any more. Seems like it's all about "content" keywords and maybe a little time-on-site. The domain is a huge signal, which is probably where the problem comes from here.

Sadly, Google's generally better against all the new AI-generated content farms than other players, so maybe they're still running PageRank somewhere.

Industrial buildings are typically built at dock height. Even if they don't do any grading, that would put the building well above any plausible flooding in that area.

There is a problem with the number of dimensions. Even a t-shirt is described best in neck, chest, waist, and you could add several parameters for sleeves and also for heights. Neither consumers nor manufacturers can really handle the combinatorial explosion, so you have to boil it down to one or maybe two dimensions.

But the reason even that isn't done is mostly history and market expectations. There are clothing categories that sell in actual dimensions, and (aside from the terrible dimensional accuracy of clothing in general) it works fine. But those are all on the "men's" side, and it seems the industry believes women will not like buying based on actual numbers.

"Plaster" can be lime, gypsum, or cement, in rough order of historical adoption. Sometimes you even use different types on the same wall; cement rough coat and lime or gypsum top coat, for example.

See also the "Ventinari clock": https://github.com/iracigt/ventinari-clock https://www.akafugu.jp/posts/products/vetinariclock/

Because this is not about charity, but about politics. Specifically demonstration with the intention of advocacy. The advocacy falls down when the demonstration is less applicable.

The idea here is that the economics of launch are changing with Starship such that the "incredible cost" and "overspeccing" of space will become much less relevant. There's a world where, because the cost per kg is so low, a data center satellite's compute payload is just the same hardware you'd put in a terrestrial rack, and the satellite bus itself is mass-produced to not-particularly-challenging specs. And they don't have to last 30 years, just 4-ish, when the computer is ready for retirement anyway.

Will that come to be? I'm skeptical, especially within the next several years. Starship would have to perform perfectly, and a lot of other assumptions hold, to make this make sense. But that's the idea.

It's a mid-50s bomber. The skin will be easy to replace. Drill out the rivets, rivet on new sheet metal. I don't think it even dragged the wingtips.

Might be some complications with the nose gear and the payload bay (the main gear is on the wings, and untouched) but nothing terribly complicated. I wouldn't be at all surprised if it was designed with some assumption of belly landings; it's a warplane after all.

Repairs surely isn't automatic, and who knows how tight that's program's budget is, but planes are repaired from such landings all the time, and if they attach any value to the vehicle it can be repaired, and not at great cost.

I think the point of this headline is that they're not being blamed in this one instance.

The dataset isn't making up fake dependencies.

That's not the sort of "regulation" in "deregulated energy market". Which was always a bad term. "De-integrated" would be better. It's a situation where energy generation and retail are separated from the transmission/distribution monopoly. The resulting energy markets (both wholesale and retail) can be and are heavily regulated (in the usual sense of the word.)

Much smaller, no atmosphere. You can get a lot closer to it in orbit. Until Apollo 14, the LM would enter a 50,000 ft periapsis on the way to landing. Dunno the exact phasing of this lander, but that video could be from a similar height (or lower, if you have good navigation.)

Or they're using "surplus" resources (like their backyard, and domestic food scraps) that they'd still have otherwise. Which is something that is not commercially scalable. Unless, I guess, someone tries "Uber but for chickens".

Cute. But 3/16" is way too large a pilot hole for any reasonable screw. I think a #24 screw, which is the largest size of wood screw, has a 3/16" pilot size... and uses a #4 Philips, which is not the bit on this thing (and is sufficiently rare I don't even have one.)

This is impractical in the US as things currently stand; most utilities have a permitting process for a grid tie (anything that backfeeds the grid) and smartmeters are capable of detecting and reporting any backfeed.

Mostly the technical aspects are not a problem (most modern meters are two-way); you'd just need a policy like the one in Germany allowing de minimis backfeed.

Hugo voters are members of the World Science Fiction Society (who are mostly Worldcon attendees). Which is to say, voters for that are chosen for enthusiasm for the genre, not taste.

The "civil" here is as in "civil aviation". Aviation is broadly either civil or state aviation.

Presumably it's derived from "civilian".

They used to keep copies of their really detailed newsletter on the website. Seems to have disappeared. But the last time archive.org saw it is here: https://web.archive.org/web/20201030183911/https://www.guede...

Dunno if they still keep up the newsletter (there's a signup form) in the same manner.

The former (terminating lines) needs more tracks/platforms at the station, because turning the train around takes more time than stopping and continuing (through running) and turning around at the end of the line.

NOTAMs are all over the place for all sorts of reasons. This is a "deal with it" scenario.

ETOPS per se makes no sense for a 4 engine aircraft (the T in the acronym is "twin-engine".) Three- or four-engine aircraft have equivalent engine-out long-range operations ratings, though.

https://www.sqlite.org/pragma.html does a pretty good job on the tradeoffs. Something like WAL you'd want to look a bit deeper on... but need not go too far afield: https://www.sqlite.org/wal.html

Starship itself will not be a great deep space delivery vehicle, in the same way current disposable second stages are used. Too big and too... reusable.

However, it'll make a great delivery system for some serious high-energy escape velocity "third" stages, rather like the Shuttle "Inertial Upper Stage" that delivered Magellan and Galileo and Ulysses.

NASA missions still routinely overperform. Curiosity's been operational on Mars for a good 12 years now.

Elon's a master at saying things that people read as something more than he actually said. I knew without seeing it that there's 0 chance that he (or anyone) actually said they're autonomous. But also that he didn't say they're not.

Well, Congress specified it to use SLS, since they were looking for extra payloads. And then uncoupled it from SLS when it became clear it couldn't even handle one extra payload.

NASA, wisely, always benchmarked the mission on Falcon Heavy, and bailed from SLS as soon as they were allowed to.

Clipper on SLS was more of a "wouldn't it be neat" scenario than the intended mission design.