> Like everything behind their breakthroughs, which they had a few - including landing and turnaround times - is meant to enable the Mars mission. They've been explicit about this since day one.
It's not so much a rocket company with a Mars objective, it's a Mars cult with a rocketry front operation.
Somehow, people get the idea that they're "not really serious" about the one driving goal that they've never deviated from.
That's not a criticism. The Mars cult is a very good thing. For forty years, most space programs have been motivated by the burning urge to...uh...send some more people to Low Earth Orbit, I guess, and eke out marginal improvements on technology that never really changes.
The force of the idea of Mars keeps people focused on what really matters.
Sorry. Was tired and in anticipation of Falcon Heavy launch (and wondering how I'll excuse myself from a telco to watch it). I misinterpreted your comment as another line of criticism this whole subthread was made of. I apologize.
It's getting tiring, really - people seem to still believe they're bullshitting with Mars, even though it was the single constant thing about SpaceX since the very inception of the company.
No worries! I guess I get people's reactions a little - they've heard so many vague plans about "maybe a Mars mission" that never pan out, so when the real thing arrives they're not ready to believe it's serious.
When you're cooking with motorbikes, it tends to accumulate at the bottom of the fryer or pan as a hot liquid which can be put down the drain, but re-solidifies once it hits the cold water in the sewer.
The ISS is in a great position, because it's in an altitude with such high drag that small objects and uncontrolled fragments deorbit very quickly. Even the ISS loses 50 - 90 m of altitude a day.
Satellites passing through the ISS's orbit do not tend to spend that many orbits there.
I can almost guarantee you that Scott Alexander is aware of who the Jacobites and the Jacobins were and what the difference is. The blog is constantly bringing up all manner of historical and political esoterica. He's making a joke based on the name resemblance.
It doesn't read like a joke. It reads like a mistake or perhaps he is assuming his audience won't be aware of who the Jacobites were and will find it funny.
I've read this blog for years. This is exactly the kind of joke he makes all the time; in describing or referring to something, he folds in a fact which, while not literally true, is a funny way of imagining it to be, and which is expected to be obvious to the readership. It's kind of like the practice of Using Capital Letters to refer to a Self-Serious Idea of Something.
The impression I'm getting from this and other comments is that San Francisco is basically a bunch of small mountains where people get mugged.
I live in a pretty flat city, but there's so much transit in the inner city (<8 minute frequencies most of the day) that seniors just take it everywhere. It's safe, it's warm, there's room for grocery carts, there's special seating for the mobility-impaired....maybe it's just implementation.
