rlt

If there were any evidence of widespread deportations of people who shouldn't be then I think you'd see more people speaking up, but there's not. People don't have to caveat their support of every policy with hypotheticals.

I also don't think most people want illegal aliens to be deported for "justice". They (rightfully or wrongly) think they're taking their jobs, contributing to crime, facilitating drug trade, costing taxpayers money, etc.

Poor training seems plausible, if not likely. But then it's not murder / "extrajudicial killing".

The Sig Sauer P320, which is what Alex Pretti had, is notorious for unintentionally discharging. Various law enforcement agencies and militaries have stopped using it for that reason.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIG_Sauer_P320

If the president campaigned on a promise to arrest everyone breaking marijuana laws, then maybe.

Where are you getting the idea that 10 innocents are being deported for every 1 illegal? Or that the "majority" of people supporting the crackdown would support that?

The information I can find suggests only a handful of cases, maybe a dozen, out of 600,000 or so.

How would they target people using voter rolls? Is the concern that it includes party affiliation? Couldn't they just provide the rolls without party affiliation?

Honestly it seems crazy even state governments know party affiliation. I know it's so they know who can vote in primaries etc, but it seems like you should just be able to register to vote with your party directly.

I think you just proved mediaman's point.

Starlink and some other constellations absolutely do maneuver if a close conjunction is predicted https://starlink.com/satellite-operators

Multiple ground stations are a fine solution for backhaul, but not most end-user use cases.

Bitcoin

Not only edge cases and standards, but also tons of performance optimizations.

These are hypotheticals / estimates, not verifiable.

If the funding cuts were so critical why have other wealthy countries or individuals not stepped in to fund them?

Are they all evil too?

I read a bunch of the relevant social media posts and emails and concluded that all parties are acting deeply childishly.

Nate shouldn’t have made a website with a domain name with Phil’s name and photoshopped meme, and brought it back up on social media years later.

Phil shouldn’t have been so aggressive in emailing Nate’s and his wife’s employers.

Sparkfun shouldn’t have overreacted by cutting off ties with Adafruit.

[citation needed]

I've seen a number of previous skeptics change their tune with Opus 4.5.

What's the process for getting an agent like Claude Code to use jscpd effectively? I assume it's just another tool call with some basic prompting?

I don’t we’re at the “companies bought too many GPUs” stage yet. My understanding is they still can’t get enough GPUs, or data centers to put them in, or power to run them. Most companies don’t even own them, they rent from the clouds.

We are, however, at the “we need an AI strategy” stage, so execs will throw anything and everything at the wall to see what sticks.

If Starship achieves full and “rapid” reusability then it seems like it would be a lot more feasible to collect and deorbit space junk.

It’s entirely possible a company like Tesla would not exist, or at least would be delayed by many years, if it weren’t started in the US.

I used to think engineers should get all the credit for the successes of big engineering projects, and they should probably get more credit than they do, but over time I’ve realized how important good leadership is. SpaceX and Tesla absolutely would not be where they are today without Elon. Anyone who claims otherwise either hasn’t paid attention or is being disingenuous because they don’t like him.

“The only difference between your phone and China's social credit system is that China tells you what they're doing.”

Weird take. There’s a massive difference between a centralized government-run system and a decentralized system run by individual companies.

Credit scores are closest but limited to financial behaviors

I didn't mean this ship and booster, I mean in a year or so when they're done with the test phase and frequently launching Starlink satellites on Starship.

What exactly do you think is the “more technology development than the current flights actually show“ needed to get into and out of orbit?

My impression is they just need to leave the engines on a little longer to get to orbit, then turn them on again with the ship pointed in another direction to get back to the suborbital trajectory they’ve already demonstrated deorbiting from.

The hard part is reentering through the atmosphere without burning up, flipping, and landing, which they’ve already demonstrated multiple times. There’s no additional atmosphere between where they’ve flown and “orbit”.

They mentioned in the stream they were intentionally stressing the ship on reentry.

But yes, “rapid reusability” is a ways off. I expect they’ll be spending weeks inspecting and repairing ship and booster before reflight for a few years, but they’ll drive it down over time.

TBD how “rapid” the reusability ends up being in the end.

The nice thing about SpaceX’s rapid iteration philosophy (and having Starlink as its first “customer”) is that they can account for engine unreliability by building extra margin into early launches, fly with reduced payloads, collect data on failures, and improve the reliability over time.

“Tries to block” is different than “fights for a piece of the same pie”.

While Starlink is never going to compete with fiber purely on speed, it’s available now, cheaper, and fast enough for residential customers. It will get faster over time as well.

> Luckily we now are able to launch stuff into orbit a lot cheaper. Including astronomy related hardware.

Honestly once Starship is operational SpaceX should subsidize launches of non-commercial astronomy hardware. Could build some goodwill to offset the negatives.

Very cool, any maybe some people are better at managing clutter, but I would make a huge mess of this space in days.

The EE lab would put it over the top for me.

“primarily a jobs program and basically only thing propping up Americans manufacturing”

Not just a jobs program, but it is strategically important to national security to retain the ability to manufacture military hardware (or at least along with allies)

It’s unfortunate that means to maximize taxpayer value we have to actually use or sell all those weapons, potentially by initiating or participating in conflicts we otherwise might not have.

> And it's not actually tax payer money but freshly minted dollars that are created through debt

Minting dollars is a form of taxation (albeit one partially paid by foreign entities that hold dollars)