NetMageSCW

6 ms·

1.
by NetMageSCW 9d ago
What I remember from back in the day was XLISP.
2.
by NetMageSCW 9d ago
Anything she buys won’t have specific drivers, e.g. Webcams or mice or keyboards or etc.
3.
by NetMageSCW 9d ago
These days it is really visible in Windows 11 as well.
4.
by NetMageSCW 9d ago
Why are you logged into OneDrive if you don’t want to use it?
5.
by NetMageSCW 9d ago
Do EU countries not have patents for what they research? Are the people helped or cured less helped or cured because the developers retained rights?
6.
by NetMageSCW 9d ago
Especially since SpaceX decided that was too expensive for a disposable rocket or even a reusable one.
7.
by NetMageSCW 9d ago
The first and second stages being disposed of aren’t pollution?
8.
by NetMageSCW 9d ago
SpaceX launched three times and would have failed if their fourth launch hadn’t worked. They certainly never had the money to launch many times and fail.
9.
by NetMageSCW 9d ago
Tesla was not a well working startup - they had no funds and he was the fourth employee. They had some ideas about making an electric car.
10.
by NetMageSCW 9d ago
Name a car they were producing before when Elon became the company’s chairman. With their three employees. Revisionist history because of your feelings is still wrong.
11.
by NetMageSCW 9d ago
How many poor people are you responsible for dying because you aren’t giving enough to support them? Cutting off aid is terrible, but you don’t get to blame the US for their dying - without blaming the rest of the world as well. That isn’t
12.
by NetMageSCW 9d ago
Did Europe have those capabilities in the 1960s? Or is this insane progress for Europe?
13.
by NetMageSCW 9d ago
I think I’ll take the word of the world’s foremost rocket engine expert over son random Internet commentator.
14.
by NetMageSCW 10d ago
So continental EU :)
15.
by NetMageSCW 10d ago
No, Soyuz was the cheapest option, but they took themselves out of the running.
16.
by NetMageSCW 10d ago
But SpaceX built a cheaper launcher to manufacture as well as gaining reuse. There was no one making an expendable cheaper rocket before SpaceX either.
17.
by NetMageSCW 10d ago
To be clear, it was NASA that was unwilling to have a ground landing on the abort engines.
18.
by NetMageSCW 10d ago
There’s absolutely no reason to believe rocket engines can only do two or three flights. SpaceX has demonstrated ten times that with F9 and with Raptor testing.
19.
by NetMageSCW 10d ago
Didn’t Blue Origin already reuse a booster?
20.
by NetMageSCW 10d ago
SpaceX is incredibly cheaper than Isar per pound, but if you only need a couple thousand pounds lifted, unless a RideShare or Transporter mission is available and suitable, you won’t by buying a SpaceX launch for $15 million.
21.
by NetMageSCW 10d ago
LOL
22.
by NetMageSCW 10d ago
Ion thrusters say “hi!”
23.
by NetMageSCW 10d ago
The issue there is we aren’t the only force for possible extinction on Earth.
24.
by NetMageSCW 10d ago
As seen in the US and by Ariane’s moves in the last few decades, that history is more of a millstone around their neck than an advantage.
25.
by NetMageSCW 10d ago
SpaceX has hadn’t any subsidies in a long time and has had less in subsidies than Ariane or Isra, so what are you criticizing?
26.
by NetMageSCW 11d ago
With a pretty good sized rocket as well. 4x Rocket Lab’s Electron payload and 4x to 9x smaller than Falcon 9.
27.
by NetMageSCW 11d ago
This second launch included some payloads - cube sats.
28.
by NetMageSCW 11d ago
Because that will never be abused.
29.
by NetMageSCW 11d ago
A good question to ask is if those locations are just switching to an alternative ALPR system.
30.
by NetMageSCW 11d ago
Look at the rights of Us citizens when confronted by ICE.

More ›