It is notable that the linked article [1] is critical of those that don't understand these concepts, then goes on to misunderstand some of the concepts.
It seems like the thesis is if cost per kg fall enough then the implausible becomes plausible. F9 reduced costs to make starlink possible, what will starship make possible?
"The consequences for SpaceX if we can not get enough reliable Raptors made is that we then can’t fly Starship, which means we then can’t fly Starlink Satellite V2 (Falcon has neither the volume nor the mass to orbit needed for satellite V2). Satellite V1, by itself, is financially weak, while V2 is strong."
Seems to me as if Starlink without Starship isn't all that great.
Also, OneWeb - despite being smaller in scope - managed to do a similar thing without reusable rockets. Now that doesn't make F9 bad - it's still a great machine - it's just not the game changer many hoped it to be.
No, OneWeb didn’t do anything remotely comparable. Starlink satellites are currently more than all the human satellites ever launched.
Smaller in scope is a euphemism, you are comparing a mere 650 satellites with 42k, 2 orders of magnitude more.
OneWeb is not even in the same category. Their technology is several generations behind in both their sat and ground terminal tech.
There is a reason they went bankrupt and were mostly solved by government bail-outs. Because its in fact not viable as a business if you have to launch on traditional rockets and have contractor produce your sats.
Classically the feature was taken away to make you safer :)
> The block on privilege mode was automatically installed because we believe it enhances security and safety while using fitness equipment that has multiple moving parts,
I believe Garland was asked about this specific issue in his hearing. He said that the distinction was that in Portland the 'riots' are not disrupting the normal function of government.
I like Merrick Garland, and thought it was tragic he's not on the Supreme Court.
That being said, the riots in PDX (my brother lives there, and I was there in the summer when it was happening) were an example of a complete, willful capitulation of local government to radicals. The Capital Riot was an involuntary capitulation of the police to radicals. There is something very insidious about the former. It's reminiscent of the local government collaboration/capitulation to the KKK in 1960s Dixie.
Also, what about the occupation of several blocks in Seattle all summer long? People in congress who said absolutely nothing about a months long, armed occupation that took place with no buy-in from residents have moaned and feigned fear for their lives over a single, day long occupation of their workplace. I completely lost respect for Congressperson Ocasio-Cortez over the appalling disconnect between her perception of danger, vs the actual danger she was in during the riot. It really had the hallmarks of narcissism when viewed with the perspective of utter silence and indifference to the armed occupation of an entire neighborhood of Seattle for weeks.
President Obama's final interview before leaving office included a statement of his deep concern for the "balkanization of the media" landscape. He was right.
He drove at them after driving recklessly through a park. The shooting got lots of press coverage. The city dismantled the protest zone the next day and sent in the police the day after.
That wasn't the only black teenager killed in CHAZ. That was the second incident.
And they absolutely didn't dismantle the protest zone the next day. They dismantled the protest zone the day after protesters showed up outside of the mayor's house.
The glossed over and inaccurate nature of your comment reminds me of talking to someone who watches highly partisan media. I'm going to take a wild guess that you thought CHAZ was a good idea, didn't you?
The shooting they mentioned was June 29.[1] City workers removed barricades June 30.[2] Police cleared the area July 1.[3]
You seem to be talking about Lorenzo Anderson. He was shot just outside the protest area. The person identified as the shooter wasn't security. People who knew both of them said it was a long running feud.
What about the functioning of the populace and business? The purpose of government is to have a stable society, letting those things go seems to completely fly in the face of all of that.
Which is silly -- if they damage the building at night, and the people can't work there the next day, doesn't that 'disrupt the normal function of government'?
If all code was write-only then testing is probably a waste of time but code changes constantly.