avmich

30 ms·

481.
by avmich 2y ago
> But you don’t have to fuel it fully to go to the moon and back. Numbers: from LEO (low Earth orbit) to TLI (translunar injection) - approx. 3.1 km/s; from Moon hyperbolic to LMO (low Moon orbit) - approx. 0.8 km/s; from LMO t
482.
by avmich 2y ago
This could be solved by replacing the protection (I think solutions like that are rather common, mechanically move the flat transparent screen) or by just switching to another camera.
483.
by avmich 2y ago
It's really a matter of imagination :) . I learned about the existence of the Institute of the Problems of Asteroid Hazards long time ago, which suggested to me it's not a black-and-white type of question.
484.
by avmich 2y ago
> My prediction that they quickly will go to specialized LEO-LMO vehicles with LEO re-fueling. Two comments here. First, we assume now SpaceX is going to have Starship HLS - human landing system - which doesn't go back to Earth, doe
485.
by avmich 2y ago
> Even if SpaceX will do orbital re-fueling, it's just two-three launches, why would you need more? Wikipedia says Starship weights 120 ton empty and 1320 ton fueled, plus 100 ton payload (approximate numbers). That means fuel weigh
486.
by avmich 2y ago
No, I didn't complain about the front row seat :) calm down. And yes, SpaceX is the trend setter in the industry right now, there is no question that their approaches are more modern. Having said that, cameras today can be really small
487.
by avmich 2y ago
> I'm saying there is no point whatsoever right now, at least no material or scientific purpose. "No point" here means "no reasonable goal". In this case reasonability is subjective - somebody sees obvious reason
488.
by avmich 2y ago
Ellipse, circle, parabola, hyperbola - all so called conic sections - are orbital trajectories; when you entering the atmosphere (which means you're technically not on a strictly circular orbit), you're initially following the par
489.
by avmich 2y ago
I'd really expect SpaceX to have more cameras, and to have some shielding - maybe so that cameras would get open shields at different points in flight, so they'd be protected before that. We only saw left-back flap, I suspect ther
490.
by avmich 2y ago
> how many of those things are there? Apollo program flew once in 6 months. If we're to build a Moon base, we're going to have at least this frequency of flights - really, I'd prefer to have a great margin on top of that,
491.
by avmich 2y ago
The 4th Starship test flight was absolutely great test, which really pushed the state of the art - both in general (after all, Starship 2nd stage is 1.5-2 times heavier - when empty - than a Space Shuttle returning from orbit) and specifica
492.
by avmich 2y ago
Spherical hammer in the vacuum is a ball.
493.
by avmich 2y ago
> Recall takes snapshots of all the windows on a Windows computer's screen (except the DRM'd media, because the MPAA must have their kilo of flesh) and saves them locally. Can I turn my app's windows into DRM'd media?
494.
by avmich 2y ago
To the Moon. 1.6 km/s is the orbital speed for the low Moon orbit.
495.
by avmich 2y ago
Elon suggested SpaceX is going to have ~5-6 launches of Starship this year. It's interesting where we could expect the next launch, if everything goes reasonably well with this one.
496.
by avmich 2y ago
Not because they can't, but because they need to stay suborbital.
497.
by avmich 2y ago
There's nothing permanent in Ukraine losing territory though. It's Russia which has long-term problems incompatible with remaining as it is right now. Ukraine instead is going through the nation building, which Russia is still far
498.
by avmich 2y ago
Maybe we need to just make sure their concentration is below thresholds?
499.
by avmich 2y ago
We may (much) better control their renewal (control on new production) and employ some good "enemy", like a microorganism(s) feeding on (some of) them. It's not an easy problem for sure.
500.
by avmich 2y ago
> In retaliation google hires all your staff, and sends them to the roof to rest and vest. That's the choice of your staff and the reality you have to deal with, isn't it? I'm sure you as worker would prefer to have such a
501.
by avmich 2y ago
At this point the company from business - not product - perspective looks like a hopeless cutthroating environment, when first they didn't let the failed exec go, then, too late, realized their mistake and started loudly complaining. I
502.
by avmich 2y ago
Powerful LLM, you mean. AGI isn't there, and with this approach won't be - MS may have all the models, but if it still misses people who are needed to make better models, it's a delusion in my book. Let Satya think he got it
503.
by avmich 2y ago
Yes, propaganda plays a huge role in this war. No, it's not the reason to stop reasoning about it.
504.
by avmich 2y ago
Ukraine keeps having so many achievements in this war the notion it's losing is laughable. Do you know how long the war will need to be to get to Kiev with today's tempo?
505.
by avmich 2y ago
Those in power in Russia aren't waging war to win, they wage it to stay in power. Ending war is less useful to them.
506.
by avmich 2y ago
Both reasons are not what's supposed to happen in the institution.
507.
by avmich 2y ago
> IMHO saying no (ie declining an offer or advance) should not qualify as "unpleasant" > Not make the advance? So people should carefully avoid certain topics, lest them suggest an advance which could backfire spectacularly?
508.
by avmich 2y ago
Oh, of course if you run Google-written software without modifications, you're not really controlling it. So if you want to control it, either go inside and tinker with the code, or - easier? - switch to a non-Google browser. I thought
509.
by avmich 2y ago
> I also believe that the "advancer" needs to understand that the consequences you've outlined are a real chance and they need to be okay with those consequences before making an advance. What you'd do if you're
510.
by avmich 2y ago
A lot depends on the circumstances - the advance-rejection isn't as simple as request-response in a client-server system. So, saying no may e.g. turn into an attempt, maybe unintentional, of public humiliation, with consequences - for

More ›