Mando

@ADeerNamedMando

the deer with the most panacheer

They/he

i make videogames and draw and write | NSFW

Mando @ADeerNamedMando11/19/2023, 6:05 PM

Casey @atomheart

Bruno Dias @bruno11/19/2023, 4:12 AM

the thing that drives me insane is all the people patiently explaining that spacex rockets are "supposed to explode" because this is "rapid iteration" so they're just trying to throw shit up in the air as fast as possible to see how it breaks

like. no! you are not supposed to apply software development methodology to things that can explode. that is very much not a thing you should do. you should not 'rapidly iterate' on space rockets. software engineers should have to undergo deprogramming before being allowed to work in other fields.

Casey @atomheart11/19/2023, 4:29 AM

This page's posts are visible only to users who are logged in.

jackie stackie @jackie-stackie11/19/2023, 4:36 PM

no, there wasn't. We decided rockets with humans on them shouldn't explode, and we're all pretty well aligned on that! But a rocket that explodes ~~does not~~ edit: should not pose a significantly greater human or environmental safety risk than a rocket that does not explode. It really does not matter if they blow up or not

edit: this is too strong of a statement. Uncrewed rockets blow up, and it should not matter except to, like, the manufacturer and launch customers, because it was all gonna end up in the ocean eventually. I believe that Boca Chica is an unacceptably risky launch site, and the failed launch in April of this year did have a significant environmental impact

Casey @atomheart11/19/2023, 5:48 PM

This page's posts are visible only to users who are logged in.

Mando @ADeerNamedMando11/19/2023, 6:05 PM

(i would also recommend people check out Ignition (the book) for an overall understanding of how unbelievably toxic the substances involved in making rockets go brrr are)

(although admittedly it's a very old book by now and i'm not really a rocket guy, but still)

You must log in to comment.

in reply to @bruno's post:

@garak11/19/2023, 4:31 AM

The entire reason that software uses rapid iteration is because attempts are cheap! Iteration is not an inherently superior methodology invented by big-brain-havers, it's simply an adjustment to living in a particular part of the graph of "cost to design" vs "cost to build." And that's where it should stay.

The Swedish Games @TheSwedishGames11/19/2023, 9:50 AM

So they're doing a real-life version of Kerbal Space Program? (note: I've never actually played Kerbal Space Program)

JP @vectorpoem11/19/2023, 5:08 PM

apparently the UI for the life support pods on those things run on Electron, lol

also the total carbon footprint of a single rocket is probably comparable to that of a medium sized city's monthly footprint, or something

Bruno Dias @bruno11/19/2023, 5:10 PM

Lmao I made a video game in Electron and thought it was inadequate for that application

Utter brain rot

JP @vectorpoem11/19/2023, 5:20 PM

the OceanGateification of space

Zuthal @Zuthal11/19/2023, 7:25 PM

~1000 tons of methane in the whole Starship/Superheavy stack, which is about equal to the yearly gas consumption of 550 average US households.

Zuthal @Zuthal11/19/2023, 7:23 PM

Where are the people saying they are "supposed to explode?"

Though this test flight was going to expend the vehicles anyways, the general argument is "Despite the vehicles exploding, the test flight was still a success, because it met the milestones defined for success (make it through hot staging without vehicle failure and don't destroy the launch pad) prior to the flight".

And idk, I'd much rather iterative testing with uncrewed vehicles than putting crew on the very first flight of a new vehicle like what NASA did with Shuttle.

Gay Eminem on 9/11 @DecayWTF11/20/2023, 5:08 AM

This is an embarrassing thing to write. You should feel bad about it. Enterprise was in testing for four fucking years before STS-1. It famously went through numerous rounds of atmospheric testing, meeting all of its own testing milestones. And, unlike Starship, those milestones included "not blowing the fuck up"! At no point did it explode and destroy the test vehicle, not did it need to!

And idk, I'd much rather iterative testing with uncrewed vehicles than putting crew on the very first flight of a new vehicle like what NASA did with Shuttle.

I can't even in good conscience say you're lying because this statement is so fucking stupid and easily debunked I feel like you couldn't possibly be doing this deliberately but I strongly, strongly encourage you to stop idolizing idiot billionaire Nazis.

Zuthal @Zuthal11/20/2023, 4:14 PM

Yeah, NASA did a bunch of component testing, but they still did put crew on the first fully-integrated flight of Shuttle. And where have I said anything about Musk? The man being a complete fuckwad doesn't diminish the actual achievements of SpaceX engineers.

Plus, Starship has been doing flight testing for four years now too.

rafaquatro @rafaquatro11/19/2023, 7:48 PM

guys really to be like "no you dont understand theyre are not just stupid, theyre stupid on purpose"

Pinned Tags

mando.art