bumby

15 ms·

241.
by bumby 1y ago
Thanks! That’s great information. Do you have any data on how that performance compares to medical-grade devices?
242.
by bumby 1y ago
To the point above, we should be careful about making strong conclusions if there is a lot of uncertainty in the underlying data.
243.
by bumby 1y ago
A couple things: 1) I’d like to see additional measures beyond dB. A 50dB consistent white noise does not bother me (and may even enhance my sleep) but an intermittent off/on sound of the same magnitude has a very different effect 2) w
244.
by bumby 1y ago
The government took a risk on an unproven launch provider. The fact that they were unproven is precisely why private money wouldn’t bet on them. When they secured large government contracts the risk balance changed and private money started
245.
by bumby 1y ago
You’re right, but missed the point. It’s great they designed for reusability. However, little private money was willing to bet on that early in the game. It was still reliant on a govt willing to take that risk. That’s the way high risk nas
246.
by bumby 1y ago
It would be nice to hear the contrary perspectives that lead to downvotes. From my perspective, the advice dynamic is very clear. There was relatively little investment and private customer engagement with SpaceX until large government cont
247.
by bumby 1y ago
So I’m assuming the simulations lead to better controls software and/or mechanical nozzle designs? Similar to how CFD leads to more efficient vehicle aerodynamics? I guess I’m trying to connect the dots on how a simulation improves the
248.
by bumby 1y ago
> they used a lot of the public funds to just throw shit at the wall, and see what sticks. This is where I think the business acumen came into play. Because the govt is self-insured, it allowed SpaceX to pass the high risk off to the ta
249.
by bumby 1y ago
Can you elaborate on the advances in deep throttling?
250.
by bumby 1y ago
It may be important to note that SpaceX and Tesla finances are likely intertwined. This is a common dynamic among Musk’s companies. So while Tesla is not a contractor, its finances do affect government contractor risk. Tesla stock has been
251.
by bumby 1y ago
JPL is also not really “NASA” in the same sense. There are only a handful of civil servants and the CalTech as a contractor. It’s similar to the “quasi-government” operations of national lab.
252.
by bumby 1y ago
It does read to me that many people view this with the same lens we apply to private companies. As an example, some of the bloat is intentional because it buys down political risk. It would be more efficient to have a program like SLS done
253.
by bumby 1y ago
How are you measuring effectiveness? It seems like you might have a pretty shallow perspective on what NASA does and what their goals are. For example, do you know how many mission directorates they have and how they differ?
254.
by bumby 1y ago
You missed the part where NASA engineers were told to pipe down about concerns because it wasn’t their place to drive the design. There were numerous, the ones I’m familiar with involved touch screens in cockpits and the amount of reliabili
255.
by bumby 1y ago
I think the OP was alluding to unreliability in the CEOs mental state, but I’ll add another aspect: they are sometimes skirting well-established norms. An example is not performing material quality checks on critical parts. This is standard
256.
by bumby 1y ago
Eh, not so much. They have reviews, but it is a much more hands off approach. * There were instances where NASA engineers brought up issues with designs and were told it wasn’t their role to drive the design. The concept of CCP was they wer
257.
by bumby 1y ago
It would potentially mitigate the risk identified by the GGP regarding “unreliable” contractors who force risks on you that you may not want. Same reason I often choose to do house maintenance myself. Not to say it’s also not without costs&
258.
by bumby 1y ago
Yes, but the government has much more control over all aspects, especially design. That changed with the commercial crew program.
259.
by bumby 1y ago
Were you prescient enough to claim that at the time of the contract or only in hindsight? At the time, most thought Boeing was the safer bet.
260.
by bumby 1y ago
That’s fair. My intent was not snark but to maybe spark some curiosity about what that military spend goes towards. But I think the OP could have framed it a little better to indicate they understood that nuance. Just like the budget cuts f
261.
by bumby 1y ago
> reduce military spending…No need to cut research You do know the military spend on research dwarfs any other federal agency, right? The DoD research budget is about 5X that of NASA. This gets to the point early where it’s easy to be
262.
by bumby 1y ago
This is true but I’ve wondered how much of the dynamic is because Tesla offers a limited number of models. As others have said, Tesla is a status symbol. Meaning people often want one just because it’s a Tesla. For someone who is set on a T
263.
by bumby 1y ago
How do you define “success”? Is “return” just in pure economic terms or are we also measuring other benefits to society?
264.
by bumby 1y ago
Yep, at least using numbers from an LLM, the break even emission standpoint seems to be about 3-4 years. For people who use leases to get a new car (average lease is 36 months) they’d be doing more harm to the environment, but for people wh
265.
by bumby 1y ago
I feel like that lack of standardization is part of the problem. Some manufacturers may pick different times to avoid nuisance braking, but that translates to higher risk to the driver. I’d like to see some core parameters like this standar
266.
by bumby 1y ago
It really depends on the grid emissions. If you’re charging your EV in Vermont (mostly hydro grid) vs West Virginia (mostly coal fuel), it can be orders of magnitude different.
267.
by bumby 1y ago
The environmental aspect I rarely hear discussed is how much carbon would be saved by maintaining your existing vehicle instead. The existing car is already a sunk carbon cost and manufacturing is a huge emitter. It’s more nuanced of course
268.
by bumby 1y ago
Literally what Boeing did with their software upgrade to read the (already installed) second AOA indicator
269.
by bumby 1y ago
Not “all” crash data, though. > and the crash involves a vulnerable road user being struck or results in a fatality, an air bag deployment, or any individual being transported to a hospital for medical treatment.
270.
by bumby 1y ago
This is the same attitude that people used to try and avoid any culpability for Boeing in the 737-Max crashes. Even if they was a technical way to avoid a crash, it doesn’t avoid negligent or blatantly bad engineering practices. There’s a r

More ›