maccam94

I didn't realize there was any other way to interpret it besides "getting green (successful) results for all of the tests" (there are 8 test stages planned). I think we're both wrong though:

"The term “green” refers to the new hardware that will work together to power the stage, and “run” refers to operating all the components together simultaneously for the first time." --https://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/green-run-test-...

I still think these tests should be run more than once though, the RS-25's were originally reusable anyway.

Falcon 9 launches are often less than $60M. A big chunk of that is the disposable second stage. Fairings are also a few million dollars. Insurance rates on Falcon 9 launches are currently 4%, so ~$2.4M. I'd be shocked if non-rocket/fuel costs were more than $15M.

> massive tanks of explosives flying through the air at supersonic speeds

I mean, so were Concorde jets...

SLS proponents have been claiming that all of the extra time and money spent on process and formal verification would lead to a rocket that works without having to do lots of trial-and-error like SpaceX. Heck, even the name of the test campaign, the "Green Run," kind of reflects this hubris and shows that NASA expected the tests to largely be a formality.

By web, do you mean websites? Does that include images? JavaScript?

Sadly Linux users are like 1% of the market, non-ext4 is even less (and I am a full-time Linux user and big ZFS fan). They actually restored support for several non-ext4 filesystems over a year ago[1].

1: https://hub.packtpub.com/dropbox-walks-back-its-own-decision...

If you look at the very end of the second video, you can see that the camera pans behind the cameraman and shows a bunch of people trespassing beyond the barricades. The position the police were defending was already compromised.

I've found that it engages the same parts of my brain as writing software, and I only have a limited amount of time each day that I'm able to focus on either activity. So to some degree it is self-balancing, but it's also possible to lose 4-6 hours while playing it if you get in the zone.

The issue is that the sound waves bounce off the pad back towards the rocket. Once the rocket has left the pad, the sound waves proceed behind it and there's no risk of them hitting the body.

Note that the $2M is to launch a fully loaded (100 tons of payload) Starship into low earth orbit (LEO). Launching it further, such as to the Moon or Mars, requires refueling while in-orbit. I've seen estimates from Musk that it would take 6-7 launches of a tanker variant of Starship to deliver enough fuel to fill an empty Starship (it could be stockpiled in an orbital depot ahead of the main payload launch). So the total launch cost might be more like $15M for a fully-loaded ship. Which is still crazy cheap compared to SLS ($2B/launch), and Falcon 9 costs $15M just to get 13 tons into LEO.

Yeah, all I've heard is $53M for testing in-orbit refueling and $135M for developing the lunar lander version of Starship for the Artemis program.

But nginx is usually just a proxy for connecting to app servers, and your app servers still need to handle all of those requests.

> In the ones SpaceX didn't win, the winning bid was nonetheless forced lower

This sounds like a really satisfying result. Do you have any sources on specific areas where that happened? I was kind of surprised that Starlink wins weren't more broadly distributed through more states, do you think the FCC was trying to spread the funds around between multiple ISPs?

I think this capacity level is only intended for low earth orbit, maybe lunar missions at most.

The subsidy is spread over 10 years, so they only get $88.5M/year.

Don't forget that the poles are usually owned by an existing power or telecom company, and if they even let you use their poles, you have to pay rent on the pole. Same for conduits. Building new poles and conduits can also be legally difficult and expensive.

There's not much we can do if Earth is hit with another giant asteroid. Or some massive biological or radiological disaster. Or some other type of impossible to predict or mitigate disasters that could render Earth uninhabitable for humans. Musk's goal is to make the human race multi-planetary, not escape to Mars. Just as you should back up your critical data more than one hard drive, or run redundant servers to ensure your service runs reliably, populating multiple planets would ensure the continuity of the human race should some disaster befall us on Earth.

Actually the pump has to be able to put out as much if not more pressure than the pressure generated in the combustion chamber, otherwise it wouldn't be able to push a steady stream of fuel and oxidizer into the chamber.

I recommend watching or reading https://everydayastronaut.com/raptor-engine/

Building on the other comments here, SpaceX has more knowledge and certainty about recent and upcoming launch economics than other satellite providers, which opened up the possibility of a system like Starlink. Starlink is capable of such higher bandwidth and lower latency due to its lower orbit. Each satellite has a fixed amount of bandwidth capacity, and the area it covers is based on how high it is (how much of the Earth it can see at one time). High orbits mean they cover more area and spread that bandwidth out between more customers, low orbits mean less coverage area per satellite (so you need lots of satellites for global coverage) but more bandwidth per customer in that area.

Yeah, I'm just so used to watching Falcon 9 landings where it's falling through the exhaust because of atmospheric drag.

If you flip around and fire the engines to decelerate, you would be flying into the exhaust.

Edit: Actually this hurts my brain. If you're going 1,000,000MPH and fire propellant at 500MPH in your direction of travel, it would travel at approximately 1,000,500MPH and you would decelerate below 1,000,000MPH, so you actually wouldn't run into it. There's no drag on your exhaust in space like there is in an atmosphere...

The post makes a huge leap which doesn't make sense to me. They claim that it makes sense to not test the use of security privileges in CI, and instead route "reports" to a separate security team, who will then somehow know whether this app should or should not be using the key. And then even block access when the app isn't known to use the privileges. Shouldn't this just be a declarative configuration alongside the app, and then allow the security team to audit which apps are given what privileges? That seems like an actual "least privilege" implementation. This seems more aligned with the first two Ways.

Up until 2005/2010 (the start of ITER), it was more like 30+ years away (ex: https://imgur.com/3vYLQmm ). 5 years is a while but 2025 has been the target for CFS for several years now.

It is absorbed by the FLiBe salt blanket in the ARC design and converted to heat. The hot salt is circulated out and the heat is used for power generation before the salt is recirculated.

The SPARC design uses a combination of extremely high strength magnetic fields to contain charged particles inside the vacuum chamber and a molten-salt blanket (FLiBe) for neutron capture and cooling. They believe this will be a viable containment system.

Timeline (in case you want to skip over some parts):

00:01:00 - introducing Dennis Whyte, MIT department head for nuclear science

00:04:24 - presentation starts

00:06:00 - identifies breakthrough with REBCO magnets

00:07:25 - explains deuterium-tritium fusion

00:12:30 - basic metrics for reactor performance

00:17:15 - energy output of other previous fusion experiments

00:19:00 - examines ITER and the problems of its approach

00:22:00 - problems solved by high energy magnetic fields

00:28:15 - full scale reactor concept, teardown of REBCO magnets

00:37:00 - design limits and margins

00:39:00 - fixes plasma instabilities found in weaker magnetic chambers

00:40:00 - maintainability, lifespan, component replacement

00:45:00 - solution to neutron damage and energy capture

00:50:30 - cost and profitability

00:54:00 - full graph of field strength vs reactor scale (and thus funding requirements)

01:01:50 - Q&A

01:30:00 - question about the biggest risks

Also a more recent video, with more numbers and even more confidence than the first: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY6U4wB-oYM

This reactor prototype has gotten private investment, because it is both comparatively affordable (hundreds of millions instead of tens of billions of dollars) and it will likely be profitable to license the technology to commercial plant operators. It is unlikely that commercial reactors would require public funding.

Decommissioning costs should be negligible because the reactors won't generate radioactive fission byproducts. The reactor chamber is designed for a 10 year lifespan and easy replacement. The old chamber is slightly radioactive (due to neutron bombardment) for a few decades, which is much less of a problem than the highly radioactive waste from fission plants that has to be stored for thousands of years.

It's unrealistic that someone would write a GUI interface in response to an active computer attack. The reference: https://youtu.be/hkDD03yeLnU

NetworkManager is the one exception I'm aware of here, but I don't think any server distros use it. Using NM is also the best option for configuring desktop environments, so I wouldn't bother disabling its resolv.conf management functionality.

I'm pretty sure that just replacing the /etc/resolv.conf symlink with a regular file will prevent all of the major network configuration tools from modifying it. I've verified this for resolvconf and systemd-resolved at least:

> To make the resolver use this dynamically generated resolver configuration file the administrator should ensure that /etc/resolv.conf is a symbolic link to /run/resolvconf/resolv.conf. This link is normally created on installation of the resolvconf package. The link is never modified by the resolvconf program itself.[0]

> To improve compatibility, /etc/resolv.conf is read in order to discover configured system DNS servers, but only if it is not a symlink... [1]

[0]: http://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/zesty/man8/resolvconf.8....

[1]: https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd-res...