wumpus

@upwardbound appears to be mentioning vegetarians as flamebait, so if you want to engage with that, be my guest.

This has nothing to do with vegetarians, and responding will only bring woe.

> Ocean fishing requires very little energy input

So all of those studies pointing out that most ocean fishing only happens because of subsidized fuel are wrong?

Tesla did make money for a couple of quarters only because of incentives, now they're solidly profitable.

It's fun to watch how many years people will post this former "fact" for!

> They need the specific impulse that hydrogen offers.

They wanted it, sure: there's more than one way to build a big rocket, and the choice that Congress/NASA made was to use hydrogen on a sustainer stage.

They could have made other choices.

Let's see: killed a ton of people, was extremely expensive, ...

Big tanks are a big part of why SLS is financially inefficient.

Geology is 100% political when it is talking about climate change.

Imagine how political geology was when it was the major proof against the world being created in 4004 BC.

Your nuclear neighbor that has a ton of their nuclear plants offline because of excessive heat preventing adequate cooling?

Have you ever vacationed in Europe?

Remember those VW execs arrested while going to vacation in the US? Part of "dieselgate".

The European Commission sent me some questions about competing with Google. I couldn't figure out if it was because I was a search engine, or if it was just that I had an app that competed with some part of Google.

Either way, I asked my lawyers if I had to answer, given that we had zero revenue coming in from Europe. They said no, I didn't for this kind of request, but they could easily send me a more vehement request that I did need to answer.

I ignored the EC, and didn't get that second letter.

BTW, my lawyers are smart enough that I had the only search engine threatened by but never sued by Perfect 10.

Twitter's recounting of the story disagrees with you:

https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspensio...

I'll take their word over yours.

Showing an ad to an EU citizen or someone in the EU is doing business in the EU, says the EU.

But indeed, you are correct that geoblocks reduce liability.

Tons of companies can provide services to cruise ships, with bandwidth and latencies depending on how sophisticated their satellites are, and their choice of orbits.

SpaceX has 3 direct competitors in similar orbits. All 3 have global (ITU) regulatory approvals, but are behind on building and launching things.

I have both the watch complication and a menu-bar app on my Macs, but then again I'm an astronomer who works in a world-wide collaboration.

The HLS and Gateway Resupply contracts were fixed price.

I'm sure neither was easy to estimate.

There are several examples of recent competitions that undercut your thought experiment: HLS, Gateway Resupply, Commercial Crew, Commercial Cargo, ...

So if SpaceX wins a contract, such as Commercial Crew, that's pork barreling?

> 'move fast and break things'

Wow, they invented that phrase? I had no idea.

The best way to get high launch frequency for a crewed rocket is to have it launch on top of an existing, heavily-used uncrewed rocket.

Falcon 9 and Atlas 5 are two examples. NASA's safety advisory board has said very positive things about the safety aspects of using a frequently-launched rocket.

Falcon Heavy is fully certified for the most difficult level of uncrewed launches by NASA and the Space Force -- including reusing side boosters.

NASA's crewed rating is one step farther, but not a huge step farther.

I've seen a lot of people claim that, but it's misleading. Falcon Heavy is the most powerful rocket to LEO, GEO, TLI (trans lunar injection), and higher energy orbits like the ones you use for Jupiter and beyond.

When SLS finishes development, it will also hold the record for all 3.

The ad revenue is worth pennies, and the "choice" of using an adblocker vs paying 10 pounds extra is pretty invisible.

Neither of these are what anyone asked for.

This discussion definitely sets a record for "people writing the most words to explain to me things I already know". Hopefully some spectators got something out of it.

Fun story, I once volunteered to play a piece at 440 and a piece at 415 in the same concert, not realizing that it would take a long time for the instrument (a viola da gamba) to "settle" after that drastic of a change.

> Perhaps you're used to organs and keyboards with different tuning choices?

I am not aware of any manuscript having different tuning of organs vs other keyboards in the Renaissance or Baroque eras... can you cite one?

The Wikipedia article for Wolfsquinte makes it clear that it has nothing to do with keyboards or organs: it's a feature of your choice of tuning. Perhaps you're used to organs and keyboards with different tuning choices?

Some players of fretted instruments move the frets to match individual pieces of music.

In modern rock music, some musicians will change guitars every song to have sweeter chords depending on the particular chords in that song.

You probably were "sweetening" chords without realizing it.

About 80% of the article is devoted to explaining why your comment is missing the point.

Most search engine people don't call ahrefs or semrush search engines -- they're SEO tools.

Having to have existing market share as a search engine is going to really limit the number of participants.