You are talking to idiots that think that tariffs are paid by the exporter, not the importer.

Yep. Essentially sunk-cost fallacy. And it makes things worse. It is hard to feel comassion for people that aggressively are doing it to themselves.

Talk about collectively digging your own grave. Such a smart move...

I am aware.

It is insanity, greed, hype and FOMO. The money invested and the ages paid are totally decoupled from the value of the product (low as that is) now. Usually that is a sign that the end of the mass-hysterics is near.

The end of this hype myst be near. And the collapse at its end will probably a lot worse than expected.

A lot. I do understand that these days you have to wade trough 100's of appkications that are just crap and where the people will not be a fit to find one possible canidate. But what assures you that AI it not filtering that one candidate out as well?

Yes, they will get caught. Yes, they will go to prison. And, yes, they will pay for the damage, probably for a long, long time.

This is just the latest escalation in a long-running arms race that incentivizes both sides to spam and use automation. It goes back at least as far as employers using keyword filtering. Now with AI-generated applications, AI-hosted interviews, and ghost jobs, the process is so completely broken that hires rarely happen without "connections." It's turned previously somewhat-meritocratic job markets into the pure cronyism of a corrupt 3rd world country because that's the only hiring option that hasn't been ruined by automation.

Unfortunately applying for 100 jobs doesn't mean getting invited to 100 computerized interviews these days, on average you'd get a number of interviews you could count on one hand, so things are far worse for job seekers who have clearly lost the arms race and are getting absolutely massacred.

I've heard people propose attaching fees to job applications to keep job seekers from growing the haystacks with spam, and while it would work to do that it would also act as an inequality accelerator. But if there were some system in place to limit the number of applications that job seekers could send and punish companies that post ghost jobs it would greatly improve the system.

Rapid Accelerated Disassembly?

Rapid Anomalous Disassembly?

Or did you mean R.U.D. (Rapid Unscheduled/Unplanned Disassembly)?

Starship burns methane, not RP1.

Between SuperHeavy and Starship, a fully-loaded stack needs 3500 tons of LOX and 1000 tons of CH4. So what do those cost?

Well, oxygen is easy to get from the atmosphere, so the cost of LOX is really just some equipment (which isn't terribly expensive to buy and maintain) plus electricity, and the cost ends up being dominated by the cost of electricity. It takes between 150 kWh and 800 kWh to separate and liquify a ton of oxygen, so if you're paying $0.10 per kWh, LOX costs $15-80 per ton. There are some other costs to handle and store it, so let's say $100/ton.

CH4 can be created many ways. The cheapest is probably to purify natural gas, which costs about $190 per ton (that site shows ~$5 per 1000 ft^3, and a ton is 38k ft^3). Add some costs for purification and cooling, so call it $250/ton.

3500 tons LOX * $100/ton + 1000 tons CH4 * 250/ton = $600k. Musk usually calls it $1M, which seems pretty reasonable, since they're probably not separating/purifiying it themselves and there transportation costs. 150 tons of payload to LEO with $1M worth of fuel means the fuel-only cost is $6.67/kg.

Nonsense. Our only experience with reusable orbital rockets is the space shuttle, which was an unsustainably-expensive and complex beast that was more refurbishable than reusable and had a payload one fifth of what Starship is designed for. It's all of the differences that aim to make Starship both reusable and cheap that make it hard. It's possible that it's just too ambitious, that we don't yet have the technology to make a cheap, fully-reusable (not refurbishable, reusable) orbital rocket with massive capacity. No one else has done it... no one else is even trying, that's how hard it is.

Failure is expected. If they managed to launch and land both Starship and SuperHeavy in less than a dozen test flights, that would be the surprise.

What a stupid question. The answer is that isiolationist, they become even more dangerous. Yes, they censor and surveil, but even then it is better if they have Internet than not.

Indeed. Waste heat is just one of that fake "arguments" by the typical deniers. On the other hand, waste heat is what currently causes France to have to shut down their nuclear reactors.

... a thing obviously not done or not done competently at the Norwegian lottery. This should cause liability and get those responsible (the ones that hired the incompetent coder and tester) fired.