![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://beehaw.org/pictrs/image/23b10d50-5c1f-45da-be43-07f234fc229b.png)
Every new signal defy explanation for a little while, until it’s explained.
Every new signal defy explanation for a little while, until it’s explained.
Different groups and people are calling SpaceX a dominant launch provider and even a temporary monopoly.
Space is different from other sector. That’s doesn’t make it immune from the risk of monopoly.
I hope they succeed. Access to space shouldn’t depend on a single company, especially one owned by Musk.
She probably find that silly, but do these silly thumbnail anyway because that’s what work with the YouTube algo
Considering it’s operating without backup since 1982, we’re incredibly lucky that system hadn’t failed until now.
The manufacturer deserve some credit too.
This seems like good news for RocketStar since they’re doing a press release, although it’s hard to understand the significance.
A news article would be even more interesting, in order to have more context and a more objective coverage.
And it can potentially work only for genetic decease. I’m not sure any type of diabetes would qualify.
Yes it’s hard, which I acknowledged by saying if they have ambitions, go big and recycle materials in space. But you make it sounds like it’s nearly impossible, which I doubt.
We know how to keep air in space stations and capsules, without involving force fields or any other sci-fi tech.
For sure, building in space it different from building in earth gravity, but that doesn’t necessarily make it impossible. There already have been experiments and small-scale demonstrations in space:
Another example is a microgravity extrusion experiment in the ISS between from 2021 to 2023,
I assume it’s easier to start by building small parts, and progressively build larger parts, until hopefully we’re able to build most ships parts. The assembly can presumably happen in the vacuum of space, without air. There’s potential for ultimately building ships in orbit larger than anything we could lift with a rocket.
Indeed. I’m thinking of CRISPR/Cas9 which is a genetic editing method, which is more ethical.
Is it worth trying land such a large rocket/ship when a small capsule does the job? Is it possible at all?
I get that SpaceX aims for re-usability, but if they have ambitions, go big and recycle materials in space to build space parts/ships/stations in-situ.
Next, could we boost diabetic people’s insulin production?
Interesting. I recently noticed new decorative lights outside a public building nearby. Instead of static white lights, these are red-ish, and slowly dim in and out in a sequence. This might be a way to reduce the impact on wildlife.
That’s promising but also very, very early development. It’s too early for the hype and such headlines. This treatment still have to succeed in preclinical trials, then multiple clinical trials.
The research is still in its early days and the next step will be pre-clinical animal trials.
It’d be great if proven effective, but most treatment as this stage of development fail because they’re either ineffective in human trials, or have bad side effects. A small minority succeeds and improve patients life.
This reminds me of Glootie.
Glootie is a character that first appeared in Introducing: Glootie! […] He has DO NOT DEVELOP MY APP tattooed on his forehead.
Someone like Glootie once once asked me to develop his app. I expertly dodged the bullet by referring him to an organization that coordinates freelance developments. Someone explained to him that he’d need 1 or 2 developers plus a project manager, and probably told him typically hourly rate and number of hours for such projects. Never heard him again speak about the app.
I always take several years for new storage technology to go from the lab to public computing devices, if it even makes it out of the lab.
It’s safe to bet that 3/4 of new tech advances of that sort have serious limitation that are deal-breakers. And the rest takes at least 5-10 years to become mature and cheap enough so that it’s accessible to average folks.
it suffers from a chicken-and-egg problem: Airlines don’t want to buy SAF because it can be several times more expensive than standard aviation fuel
Only because we refuse to tax carbon, and increasingly subsidize fossil fuels.
Clean alternatives will be much more competitive once carbon is properly taxed, and we stop subsidizing polluting industries.
Or the opposite. One could say it’s filtering out the vaccine which they falsely claim people are shedding.
Took me a second to understand.
Apparently not yet, astronomers are still waiting for the signal to repeat to appropriately study it.
For now there are just guesses. If such burst isn’t a fluke and repeats, astronomers will get a chance to better study it and provide a confident explanation.