Producers and consumers

[Neutral Observer]

Just the opposite. Manipulation requires effort.

Quite true. It's known as "The Principle of Least Effort"

Which to me means, that when you're part of the problem, it's easier just to blame someone else.

 

[All Becomes New]

Just the opposite. Manipulation requires effort.

Does manipulation always require more effort? Probably not. It's easier to tell a white lie than the full truth.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Not sure how much more they can squeeze out. Perhaps a factor of 2 or 3 (which would be fantastic, but still not "cheap").

The smaller, Falcon9 is basically fully reusable and the same rocket is used as a reusable booster on the Falcon Heavy. (I'm sure they'd like to extend the number trips made by each rocket and reduce ground turn around time and cost, but I suspect we are a ways a way from when rocket reuse looks like the check process used between car rentals. They may already be ahead of the Space Shuttle program in terms of require inter-flight maintenance. ) The manned capsule is also multi-mission.

The core stage of the Falcon Heavy is a bit harder to deal with given how high up and down range it must go. I don't know their plans but perhaps they want to replace it largely with Starship launches using its Superheavy booster. We'll see how that works out.

(I continue this sub-thread, since rocketry is at least board on-topic.)

I'm not sure what improvement they're anticipating over current levels, but the newer rocket engines are much simpler than the previous version, and more powerful & efficient. I think with the Falcon series, it's the turn-around time that can be most improved. AIUI, the Falcon core can do a controlled return & landing for some orbits but not for others. When Starship gets going properly some time this year, the aim is for full reusability, but I'd expect a few failures before all the bugs are sorted out.

If they can maintain the progress they've made so far, it will be remarkable - technically it seems possible, but so often these things prove harder than expected to scale up, and/or run into diminishing returns.

 

[Ophiolite]

A lot of downs syndrome babies are aborted because there are doctors who feel they do not have the right to live.

Exactly so. Your statement supports my contention that "The abusive use of the "Survival of the fittest" meme to justify indifference to human suffering is as unattractive today as it was when first introduced."

 

[Diamond72]

Which to me means, that when you're part of the problem, it's easier just to blame someone else.

Many hundreds of times I have tried to explain that to people. Sometimes they get it, sometimes they don't. It can be very scary when we realize that people have to live up to the standards they set for others. God is going to hold them accountable.

 

[Diamond72]

When Starship gets going properly some time this year,

There is going to be a bit of a delay. China is threatening to blow them out of their obit into a lot of pieces. So Musk is working on a "shield" to protect them. I use to talk to my older son about this all the time. He was an electronic engineer and said it was pretty easy to defend against these sorts of attacks. Even in Martial Arts, it is pretty easy to defend yourself by deflecting the attack of an aggressor without doing any harm. Although they may harm themselves. They teach that in Basic in the Army. It is your choice, you can just disarm them. Or you can disarm them and mess them up pretty good. Only they do it to themselves. Even my son had a training film where the instructor was 80 years old and he could still take on 5 of his student at the same time.

I think during the 1000 year reign of christ anti weapon systems will become better than any weapons that they can produce. We need to do research on the violence of the primitive brain and how the cortex controls that. Then we can have 1,000 years of peace. Some of the research on Tourette Syndrome & Parkinsons is showing us the way to resolve some of these issues.

 

[Diamond72]

Exactly so. Your statement supports my contention that "The abusive use of the "Survival of the fittest" meme to justify indifference to human suffering is as unattractive today as it was when first introduced."

Some studies have reported that more than 90% of babies with Down Syndrome are aborted in some countries where prenatal testing is widely available, while in other countries the number is much lower. My brother is a specialist in Down Syndrome. So it is putting him out of a job.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Some studies have reported that more than 90% of babies with Down Syndrome are aborted in some countries where prenatal testing is widely available, while in other countries the number is much lower. My brother is a specialist in Down Syndrome. So it is putting him out of a job.

Yeah, and curing cancer will put oncologists out of a job.

 

[Ophiolite]

Some studies have reported that more than 90% of babies with Down Syndrome are aborted in some countries where prenatal testing is widely available, while in other countries the number is much lower. My brother is a specialist in Down Syndrome. So it is putting him out of a job.

You seem to think you are disagreeing with something I said. I just see you making unrelated statements. Do continue if it feels satisfying.

 

[Diamond72]

I just see you making unrelated statements.

I have always been this way. The doctor thought it was brain damage when I was in a coma but my brother said he has always been that way all his life. So there does not seem to be much anyone can do about it.

I did take four teacher training classes at the Bible college so I could be more coherent and better communicate with people. A few more classes and I would qualify as a superintendent. Now I am letting the chatbots do more for me to organize my thoughts and make them easier for people to understand.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

There is going to be a bit of a delay. China is threatening to blow them out of their obit into a lot of pieces. So Musk is working on a "shield" to protect them.

I was talking about Starship, not Starlink. It's Starlink that China sees as potentially threatening.

But there's no feasible way to literally do what you suggest. There are thousands of Starlink satellites. Destroying even one would produce a serious hazard to other satellites in similar orbits - including the Tiangong space station(!).

They might be able to sabotage them electronically, but if they damaged or disabled reception of ground communications data for the Hall thruster reaction control system (for adjusting orbital position and deorbiting), they'd potentially have rogue satellite collisions that would be as damaging as a kinetic attack.

Either way, it risks a 'Kessler syndrome'-style cascade.

 

[Diamond72]

They might be able to sabotage them electronically,

There are shields for that. We have the technology to disable a car if we wanted to zap it's computer. But they do not want to let the genie out of the bottle or everyone would be doing it.

I think the real problem Musk is going to have is people hacking his system to steal it for their use like GPS. China is blowing off smoke and like you say, they really do not have the technology and there is no incentive to develop it.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

There are shields for that. We have the technology to disable a car if we wanted to zap it's computer. But they do not want to let the genie out of the bottle or everyone would be doing it.

The problem is that you can't retrospectively shield a satellite, and LEO satellites like Starlink have a 5 year lifespan, so there's a minimum 5-year lag time between deciding to shield and having all satellites shielded (assuming you can launch the full complement within 5 years). But given the significant extra cost involved, you're unlikely to do it unless you're convinced there's a credible threat. So it's not an easy or a cheap decision to make.

I think the real problem Musk is going to have is people hacking his system to steal it for their use like GPS.

I doubt that will be a serious problem - Musk is already contracted to produce the secure StarShield system for the US military, so expect that technology to filter down into the standard Starlink as they begin to be replaced.

 

[Diamond72]

I doubt that will be a serious problem - Musk is already contracted to produce the secure StarShield system for the US military, so expect that technology to filter down into the standard Starlink as they begin to be replaced.

Yes, my older son was an electronic engineer. I use to talk to him a lot about building a shield to protect against E-bombs and he did not think it would be a problem. It is going to cost Musk some money to protect his interests but he does not seem to think it will be a problem. He is worried about AI though because it is so powerful.

 

[Hans Blaster]

The problem is that you can't retrospectively shield a satellite, and LEO satellites like Starlink have a 5 year lifespan, so there's a minimum 5-year lag time between deciding to shield and having all satellites shielded (assuming you can launch the full complement within 5 years).

This makes me feel better about this orbital menace. The atmosphere will scrub them out of existence within a decade.

 

[Ophiolite]

I have always been this way. The doctor thought it was brain damage when I was in a coma but my brother said he has always been that way all his life. So there does not seem to be much anyone can do about it.

I did take four teacher training classes at the Bible college so I could be more coherent and better communicate with people. A few more classes and I would qualify as a superintendent. Now I am letting the chatbots do more for me to organize my thoughts and make them easier for people to understand.

Thank you for sharing that. It will make it easier for me to absorb your posts. As I remarked, they are clear and informative, they just don't always seem to connect to the flow of the conversation.

 

[Diamond72]

This makes me feel better about this orbital menace. The atmosphere will scrub them out of existence within a decade.

Originally, the Hubble Space Telescope was designed to operate for 15 years, but its longevity and continued success have led to several servicing missions, which have kept it operational for over 30 years. The latest and final servicing mission was carried out in 2009, and it is expected to continue operating until at least 2029, when its replacement, the James Webb Space Telescope, is expected to become operational.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Originally, the Hubble Space Telescope was designed to operate for 15 years, but its longevity and continued success have led to several servicing missions, which have kept it operational for over 30 years. The latest and final servicing mission was carried out in 2009, and it is expected to continue operating until at least 2029, when its replacement, the James Webb Space Telescope, is expected to become operational.

JWST is operational now.

 

[Diamond72]

JWST is operational now.

I think I have seen some photos from the new satellite.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Originally, the Hubble Space Telescope was designed to operate for 15 years, but its longevity and continued success have led to several servicing missions, which have kept it operational for over 30 years. The latest and final servicing mission was carried out in 2009, and it is expected to continue operating until at least 2029, when its replacement, the James Webb Space Telescope, is expected to become operational.

It is ironic that your non-sequitur reply to my tweet about the Starlink menace self-cleansing is to post (incorrectly) about the HST, since the greatest menace of Starlink is to astronomy.