8 ms·
Starship is not capable of reaching Mars?
- hindsightbias 2y agoSuch unoriginal conspiracies. Starship is actually a platform for climate geoengineering
- georgeg23 2y agoYeah but OP is backed by citations w/ Nature & Science.
- wkat4242 2y agoI thought it was for chemtrails?
- hindsightbias 2y agoChemtrails In Space. But since it’s a real conspiracy nobody knows yet.
- chaosmanorism 2y ago[dead]
- joegibbs 2y agoThe AI can't "leak" it, it's not like they're training it on their own classified documents. You can make it say anything with the right prompt. Also, I don't think the US or other powers would actually want to render nuclear weapons useless, since that would mean that full-scale wars are possible again due to MAD being made redundant.
- georgeg23 2y agoDidn't Elon have a Twitter meltdown today about how AI will leak your secrets? The cited Science journal paper answers your question about whether the U.S. govt wants it. As well as the quotes from Heritage and Trump. Sounds like including interceptors (Brilliant Pebbles) is a bit political, but missile tracking is bipartisan (Brilliant Eyes).
- Zigurd 2y ago"It isn't for Mars" is just a reasonable inference about how hard it will be for Starship to go farther than Earth orbit. It's over-weight, which reduces payload, which makes in-orbit refueling need way too many refueling flights, which takes too much time and requires building too many refueling rockets that each have 39 Raptor engines @ $2M each if you believe Elon's numbers. It all very readily succumbs to the rocket equation unless the very most optimistic numbers of $5M per launch and 8 launches carrying 150 tons of fuel each are actually met. If not, the only real use of a rocket that big is DoD payloads to Earth orbit.
- throw9474 2y ago100% agree
- talldayo 2y agoHow many alt accounts are you using? You've reposted this "evidence" several times over the course of multiple days/accounts with no new discoveries or concrete findings. What do you want out of us? Do you want us to deny your AI-fuelled conspiracy theory again, or ignore you?
- throw9474 2y ago[flagged]
- talldayo 2y agoThis is a reddit post from a user that appears to experience obsessive psychosis. It is not a "wikileaks discussion" but a repost of a barely-logical assertion supported with AI-generated citations. Don't insult Wikileaks by comparison, they have standards and actually do work people pay attention to.
- throw9474 2y ago[flagged]
- Marciakhan 2y ago[dead]