Bimfred

Most of the Falcon 9 launches are for Starlink and are paid for by SpaceX themselves. How is that "the government subsidizing them"? If you want to argue that they're using money they got from NASA to fund those launches, is your plumber feeding their family from you subsidizing their life?

NASA has the measurements of all their astronauts and Dragon flight suits for Butch and Suni are already made.

Yep. And if they fail to deliver on the lofty expectations they've created here, the backlash is going to be epic. I don't want to root for their downfall, but.... Imma stock up on popcorn.

A lot of that time, if not the vast majority, is likely performance testing. That's trivial to automate and can be run across 100+ systems simultaneously.

Thunderfoot's psychotic obsession with Musk and the complete denial of reality happening before his eyes it necessitates has destroyed any credibility as a scientist he ever had. The authority of a food chemist on matters of rocket science is questionable in the first place. Your blind, unquestioning acceptance of whatever drivel escapes his frothing mouth is no less pathetic.

And with that, I'm going to toast to the memory of the brain cells I've lost over the course of this "conversation". Hoping for anything even resembling a reasoned argument from you is clearly a fool's errand.

Yeah, you got nothing.

Fucking lol.

EDIT: Hoo boy, you didn't even look at what you linked, did you? My point was that SpaceX has completed 8 crewed missions. The video is just half an hour of Thunderfoot's inane rambling about launch costs. Not a single word about whether or not SpaceX has completed any crewed missions, ISS or otherwise. That's the point I'm challenging you to disprove here. Go ahead. Show your work. I'm looking forward to it.

They have 8 incident-free crew missions under their belt. Sit your ass down, the adults are talking.

What's your reasoning behind the claim that a company that's been transporting crew to and from the ISS for 4 years, and currently has a vehicle docked to the station, is incapable of launching a tenth mission? Mind that said mission was supposed to launch next week, but Starliner is being a pad princess in orbit and won't get off the required docking port.

I suppose I'm somewhat fortunate to have been a poor bastard for most of my life. 25fps with moldy potato settings was just fine, as long as the game didn't crash or deep fry the CPU, so I'm not as sensitive to the occasional drop below 60fps and don't feel slighted when I have to turn some settings down. Though I can understand being incensed when you've poured thousands into a bleeding-edge gaming rig that's supposed to handle anything at 4k, maxed out and a stable 120fps and it's the game itself dragging your experience down.

But the stutters weren't the only problem people reported early on. There were cries of the game being unplayable, on account of endless bugs, visual glitches and repeated hard crashes. Worst I got was the normal mapping on Cal's face getting real weird in certain lighting conditions. That's hardly game-breaking.

I mean if you want to invalidate my lived experience, sure. Played on release on a 5600X, RTX3070 and 32GB of RAM, 1080p, almost everything maxed out. Open areas on Koboh saw a drop to mid-40 fps, but other than that, I had one hard crash and no bugs I noticed.