SethInMI

road

I occasionally ponder how "narrow" our modern advancements are. Back in the day, they thought we would be Jetsons' level now, Cities on the moon, plentiful energy, flying cars, jetpacks, etc. We have none of that, but we have that one miracle, the incredible shrinking transistor, and it created tech that people back then would be amazed by.

I have only loosely kept track of this "let's go to Mars" thing, so I shouldn't come off as too experty. As you are well aware, there is an army of interested people on youtube who posit on the feasibility of this till the cows come home. So thanks @JerryBaumchenfor starting this digression, now I can spend my idle moments this weekend watching youtubers and deciding what year this century we will put a person on Mars.

The reason the latest rocket from SpaceX burns methane and not kerosene is they can get methane on mars. The idea is to extract fuel from the environment and use it to return to earth. He really wants to do it, and he has made far more progress toward that goal than I think anyone thought he could (say from 10-15 years ago). So what will the next 10-15 bring? It's going to be interesting.

Well there are a lot of production parts these days that are 3D printed, admittedly the metal sintered or lost wax cast 3D printing (Bugatti brake calipers, etc) I agree this Juno looks 3D printed and by a process that has low resolution which I think is the bigger problem, it looks really cheap. I mean if it holds up I guess that is fine...but yeah, and extra few bucks for a nicer look would be good. I suspect the Atlas is also 3D printed, but using a metal process. It doesn't look machined too many curved surfaces.

I don't think his chances of sending people to Mars are zero. NASA has enough faith in his new huge rocket to make it part of our return to the moon, and once that comes off, Mars def becomes a thing. Creating a permanent colony on Mars is something I wish there would be a zero chance of happening. Just a dumb idea, but that might be a thing too.

ElonJets is now on TrumpSocial! (I kid. Maybe it is though)

Nuts

Q: What do you call a constipated detective? A: NoShit Sherlock

ouch. that turn looked pretty rough. rest of the video was fun, a little too much "pointless" drifting around for my taste, I like my slides to be for something like in a rally race...but the jumps were sure fun. its funny, I used to have a Subaru STi; I followed the WRC, played rally car games, and I loved the sound of that wide open 4 cyl turbo'ed engine, with the anti-lag banging on the throttle lifts, but now I have an electric car and it all sounds a little ridiculous and dated.

son

con artist

I noticed this comment from Jesse: Why does a headwind vs tailwind matter for the roll performance? I can understand if he is talking about a change in wind speed during descent / a bit of wind shear? or that somehow near the ground there is some interaction with the surface that affects the wind just above it? otherwise the only reason a headwind would be preferred would be to slow down the landing runout right?

Groundhog Day ---------------- I found a reference I made almost a year ago...and then look what you did. The word associations run deep.

point break (wait, have I done that one before )

Mason

pittsburgh

card sharp

second base

I remember when this package was announced, and despite what the lawsuit says, I don't think many people thought it was likely that Tesla would hit the stock price targets that kicked off the giant windfall for Elon. In 2018 Tesla was trading at $21 a share and many (like brent) thought it was on the way to bankruptcy. Fast-forward to 2022 and the stock spent much of the year between 300 and 400 a share. As I read it, Elon is basically getting an additional 10% of the company, and I think most shareholders back in 2018 would be happy to trade a 15-20x increase in stock price for sacrificing 10% of the shares.

Congrats! Thanks for posting that. I love the FJC cert.

Morning ah, the 90s the gloriously alternative 90s