ternnoburn

100m is vaporware pricing. It's the $30k Tesla that drives itself. Or any of the numbers on the hyperloop. It's a made up number for the press.

I'm begging the internet to please be critical and do some basic analysis and not just believe everything they hear from that guy!

If you have the ability to pump concrete, and a gantry across the whole site, why wouldn't you pick and place concrete blocks or other materials rather than concrete the whole thing on site?

Also, aren't these walls significantly more CO2 unfriendly than lumber, and more difficult to renovate? What if I need to get a builder in to do repairs, is there a concrete wall guy who knows how to repair them?

Can it print multi family housing?

It takes four weeks to print, which seems long to frame a single story three bedroom house. If the home buyer isn't feeling savings, what's the draw here.

A lot more CO2 though, and less repairable.

There's simply no way one vehicle will be the best option in every case.

If you have a small satellite you need placed somewhere unique, firing up a huge launch vehicle makes no sense.

Smaller launch to a specific orbit. As an analogy, freight trains are one of the most efficient, cheapest ways to move freight. But moving my laundry to the laundromat is better served by another vehicle.

I wonder if there was an opportunity for the workers to buy the company. Even for pennies on the dollar.

Starship will serve a different mission profile. People seem convinced Starship will just "solve" space, but if it works, there's still going to be demand for other mission profiles that it won't make sense to send on Starship.

But if your point wasn't to say that it will be obsoleted by Starship, and just to say instead it's slower development than Starship, yeah, that's true.

I suspect the head start in infrastructure spacex has is pretty valuable in developing new programs.

Space is hard. I hope Blue Origin succeeds.

Weren't great times. But learned a lot and developed a fair bit of trauma. It was thirty years ago, or thereabouts. People were.... different about it then. Better and worse about it. A lot fewer people calling for imprisonment, but a lot fewer people willing to extend a hand to help you.

I was homeless for a year. Totally felt the same. Call me whatever.

That seems unlikely. I'm open to the possibility. You'd have to provide some evidence though.

I genuinely don't know the answer to your question. It seems like a reasonable possible interpretation?

Second question, absolutely. I think we should be worrying about those people. (I personally think safe housing is a right, and something our government should provide, but now we're veering away from Tern's explaining terms to Tern's ideas on housing policy.)

I don't think anyone said that either?

You've twice now made some pretty bad faith assertions.

Manage an engineering team

Amusingly, "he" is incorrect! You are right to call this out.

I don't think anyone here made any statements about the value of having a house?

I'm angling more towards health care and less towards good samaritans.

Now, let's continue this line of thought. What if people die because your AI told you to not take action when you could have easily intervened to save a life?

Because that's what someone decided on and people settled on. Houseless vs unhoused... shrug language follows use, and that's what some folks use.

Great, glad you are trying to understand. Let me break it down a bit for you and if you still have questions, ask away.

> The words "house" and "home" mean different things.

A house is a physical dwelling unit for humans to occupy. It's a building. A home often implies a place you reside, where you find safety and joy. The difference between these concepts gives rise to the common expression "make this house a home".

People can have homes, even without a house. For instance, a digital nomad might live in an RV or van. They would call it home, but not a house.

> "Houseless" is more correct than "homeless"

If we decouple the idea of a physical house from the idea of a home, then "homeless" people might actually have homes -- a spot they feel secure in, a place they return to.

So calling them homeless is incorrect. One can have a home but not have a house.

> except that not all housing is houses, so you'd have to make it "housingless",

Many things aren't "houses" per se, though they are housing. Apartments aren't houses, condos aren't houses, RVs aren't houses, etc. The umbrella term for house structures is "housing". These people lack housing of any type, not homes, so they could be called "housingless".

> and "unhoused" is far less clumsy.

This person would rather say "unhoused" vs "housingless", because they find it easier to say.

Hope that's clarifying. I'm not interested in discussing whether the terms are good or bad. You can disagree with their use and keep using "homeless" for all I care.

I just want you to understand the post being presented. Again, feel free to disagree, I just don't want you to feel like "I don't understand the reasoning".

They have homes, it's just that their home might be a tent under the on-ramp. Or a park bench. Or the city at large.

These people are your neighbors, your neighborhood is home to them, they just don't have houses.

That sounds like "with opt in permission".

Why wouldn't a screenshot of excel be a copyright infringement? It contains copyrighted visual design and text elements.

That said, it would be absolutely petty and foolish to pursue any action against it.

Games contain art, music, sound fx, text/story, motion design, and other elements that are copyrighted.

Again, it would be petty and foolish to pursue it.

I'm a manager of an engineering team.

That sounds like "another critical factor". A chain of events led to this. The parent is saying "one link in the chain is US involvement", you are saying, a different link in the chain is Iranian involvement. Both can be true, and neither invalidates the other. You've done nothing to invalidate the parent's post because you haven't removed their link from the chain, you've just added other salient links to the chain.

Stop treating blame like it's some simple, single element. It's a complicated, multi faceted chain of events.

I worry about let's plays (especially let's plays without commentary). They pretty clearly exist in a "yes, this is copyright infringement but yes, they are generally considered positive for a game" space.

The moment some game creator decides to test this will get very interesting. Not good interesting.

No clue why this is being flagged. It's a clear example of a SAM being used against passenger aircraft.

That's not a counter to the parent's point. The parent is saying there are many critical factors, one of which was the US performing an assassination.

Saying "there were other critical factors" both agrees with the parent post and doesn't counter the idea that the US was a factor.

Or, labeling yourself helps identify communities and systems that enable you to develop and grow more efficiently.

I'm autistic, I discovered this partway through my adult life. Labelling it has done incredible things to build support infrastructure. I have more energy and less stress now.

I'm queer, I discovered this as a young adult. It's connected me with whole communities. And most importantly, it's helped me discover and embrace the concept of a found family.

I'm a leftist. (Not a liberal, I don't vote Democrat). This label has helped me find opportunities to engage in mutual aid I genuinely find more rewarding than any charity work I've done.

Every time I add a label, I discover wonderful communities who help me explore myself, help me figure out what it means to be that label, and whether it's one I want to keep or shed.

There's nothing wrong with building an identity. You have to have introspection and periodically evaluate it, but labels are fine.

I have them, I'm autistic. It happens and I have support infrastructure in place to make it less intrusive.

It's a disability, but I sorta reject the framing that I'm "not normal". Mostly because it feels a bit more culturally loaded? I can't articulate it effectively, but like, what I experience may actually be extremely normal ... for folks with autism. So, maybe "not neurotypical", maybe?

It sounds like you want to attend them. You've clearly laid out the reasons why you find them valuable to you. That's something you "personally want to attend."