Rei, it's always this way with you. Take the chip off your shoulder.

Firstly, I see you have this notion that martian rocks must all be igneous. This is not correct. That planet has had extensive geologic hydrolysis. Noteworthy shale formations have been found at Jezero and Gale.

https://news.mit.edu/2024/stud...

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary....

The generalized composition profile for windblown dust is very high in basaltic minerals, but many noteworthy sedimentary-dominated structures have been catalogued, as above. Depending on where the regolith is sourced, its composition can vary widely. Blanket statements like 'regolith is not shale!', does not engender notions of superior knowledge. Regolith is the fine to midsized mixture of fractured rocks on the surface. Its composition will be determined by wind erosion and transport patterns, and which rocks became wind eroded. As pointed out above, large surface deposits of hydrolized mineral layers are present on mars.

Rather than pretend I dont know this, I instead correctly asserted that what you do with the collected dust after extracting the perclorate depends entirely on its composition, which will be very site-specific. The one making silly generalizations about the regolith is yourself, Rei.

But, since we are playing 'name the ignorance' in this exchange, your attestation stat perchlorate is 0.5% liberatable oxygen says 'Say i'm ignorant of basic chemistry without saying i'm ignorant of basic chemistry, and am bad at reading too.' The 0.5% statistic comes from the publication at bottom, and is the proportion of the regolith that is perchlorates. This is one of those lemons you seem to have a hard time with, so I'll hold your agitated little hand on this one.

Washing the regolith to remove the perchlorate is a requirement for *any* other use of that regolith. The chlorine it contains is a fouling contaminant for any other industrial process that you put it through. It's not optional. This stuff MUST be washed first. Even at this low of a concentration, its presence would destroy melting crucibles, and deleteriously affect the mechanical properties of resulting products.

Washing it is not optional. It's a required first step for any subsequent process.

As you have rightly pointed out, the water ice on mars is more 'frozen mud'. Cleaning the melt is going to be a necessary first step to using it *regardless*. That means either vacuum distillation, thermal distillation, or reverse osmosis filtration. Again, NOT OPTIONAL. This is necessary equipment that you need to bring, regardless. RO filtration is the least energy intensive of these.

The end products are clean water and perchlorate contaminated mud, and clean mud, with contaminated water.

Since we already have to bring the RO equipment, do it like this:

Permafrost goes in RO unit 1.
clean water and salty mud come out.

Dry, salty regolith, and the dirty mud go in an agitation and settling system. It gets completely cleaned through agitation and settling in a continuous inflow agitator, until water testing shows clean (salt free) water at the outflow. The dirty water is partially re-added to the salty mud in the RO unit, which is processing permafrost, to improve filtration. The remainder is low-sediment saline water, which is fed to another RO unit, giving potable water, and concentrated perchlorate saline solution as products.

This gets you cleaned regolith, concentrated perchlorate brine, and fresh water.

Of those, only one is a lemon. The perchlorate brine. The other two have industrial or immediate uses.

What do we do with this nasty bitter lemon? Do we complain about it, or put it to use? You seem to favor complaining about it, but that's dumb. Instead, it should be made into lemonaide.

Now that we have strongly concentrated the stuff, as a biproduct of producing other things this doomed colony needs, I remind you, the percentage of this stuff is going to be very much higher than 0.6% by weight, so kindly shove that out the airlock, and look at what perchlorate salts *are*: highly oxygenated alkali-earth and transition metal chlorine salts, with a very high recoverable oxygen value.

The very same publication that gives the 0.6% wt value, also gives us a generalized compositional makep of what perchlorates we have. They assay it as predominantly calcium and magnesium perchlorate.

Here are the percentages of oxygen (many wholly liberatable) by weight of various anhydrous perchlorate salts, including calcium and magnesium), and the thermal decomposition temperatures of each. (No electrolysis, just getting it hot enough. Though again, if we have nitrogen, we can use bioreactors for this very cheaply instead. Since thats not guaranteed, here's the thermal decomp route.)

Sodium Perchlorate (NaClO4): 52.3% liberatable oxygen by weight. Thermal decomp at 490-520C at 1atm.

Potassium perchlorate (KClO4): 46.19% liberatable oxygen by weight. Thermal decomp at 550-600C at 1atm.

Calcium perchlorate (Ca(ClO4)2): 53.56% liberatable oxygen by weight. Partial decomp at 150C(!), full decomp at 380-570C at 1atm.

Magnesium perchlorate (Mg(ClO4)2): 57.3% liberatable oxygen by weight (but requires more processing to get it all). Thermal decomp (to MgO) at 369-429C.

Aluminium perchlorate: (Al(ClO4)3): 58.9% oxygen by weight. Aluminium holds oxygen very tightly. Decomposition produces a mix of oxygen and chlorine gasses, with pure aluminium oxide as the end product. This is a useful substance, as it's a principle ore of aluminium, and a useful abrasive in manufacturing. Thermal decomposition begins at 150C, and ends at 450C. (But unlikely to be a major constituent of martian regolith)

Iron(II) perchlorate (Fe(ClO4)2): 50.24% oxygen by weight. Like Aluminium, it holds oxygen tightly. The decomposition initiates a redox reaction that turns iron(ii) into iron(iii), resulting in iron(iii) oxide (Fe2O3), and a mixture of oxygen and chlorine gasses. It functions as a catalyst in the thermal decomposition of other perchlorates. Decomposition starts at 100C(!)

Iron(iii) perchlorate (Fe(ClO4)3): 54.2% liberatable oxygen by weight. Basically the same as iron(ii), but is already oxidized to iron(iii).

Since we need to heat the now cleaned regolith to its melting point *ANYWAY*, (in order to get glasses, basalt fibre, or bisqued shales, as appropriate) we can use the same industrial plant to thermally decompose the perchlorates. If we're building sintering furnaces, we are building sintering furnaces. The decomp temps are comparatively low, compared to the temps needed for melting bassalt. The melting / bisqueing of the regolith will also evolve useful gasses we want to collect and refine later, because of local scarcities *anyway*, so having the equipment in one processing plant makes logistical sense.

Our outputs here are alkali earth oxides (mainly calcium and magnesium oxides, which are useful for making concrete) and chlorides (which are useful for an abundance of chemical processes), oxygen, chlorine, and water vapors, and industrial regolith end products (glasses, basalt fibre, or bisqued shale pellets or bricks, depending on what we fed in.)

Fractional distillation of the gasses will give you distilled water, liquefied oxygen gas, and compressed chlorine gas.

Noteworthy publications:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/a...

I am not interested in an an argumentative tit for tat Rei.

Perchlorates can be broken down through bacterial processes in water (but assumes you have the other things you need for life, which we dont here. Then again, I am open to nitrogen sources existing, but being undocumented. If they do, this by far the least expensive means), and through electrolysis with a boron doped diamond electrode set.

Which just so happens that this latter is also be your preferred method, since it breaks the water as well. The increased ion content of the water would increase bulk oxygen yeild over pure water.

Why are you complaining, instead of being informative?

As for mineral dusts being bad, it depends on how hygroscopic the dust is. Shales and clays are indeed bad (but can be sintered into bisque that is not). Fine silicon oxide species less so (but are better used to make glass). Sintered bb sized balls, being much more ideal.

Again, why be argumentative instead of informative?

The statement about bassalt fiber is not meant to be taken in a horticultural context. It's vastly more useful as a construction matetial for high pressure vessels, which any 'earth atmospheric pressure' cabin WOULD BE, compared the the outside pressure. Not all regolith compositions produce bassalt fibre when melted though, which is why there is the caveat. Even the powders not useful for either role (like calciferous minerals) have industrial uses as bulk fillers for plastic resins, and as cement.

  It's almost as if you are either unwilling or unable to 'make lemonaide' from the lemons, because you are used to using only abundant fresh fruit.

The notion that only perfectly ideal conditions or materials are required, rather than just preferred, is not consistent with reality.

A more honest appraisal looks at the costs associated with using what's actually available, and if they exceed operational thresholds or not. 'Is it cheaper than importing from Earth', and 'Can we actually systain the infrastructure required on-site' being the important questions. NOT 'can we compete with people in the market who have ideal feedstocks'.

People have made housing from regional materials for thousands of years. The kinds of conditions that forced that are present on both the moon, and Mars. Think of ways to make lemonaide, and less about how you dont have fresh guava juice.

I'm not so sure that perchlorates are such an awful sticking point.

(This is not meant to be a post in support of this study, mind. Please do not infer that it is.)

Perchlorates are a 'potentially useful' chemical salt, that form from slow dehydration and UV exposure in an oxygen rich envirionment. They contain a lot of chemically bound oxygen, that is relatively easy to liberate, producing reactive oxygen species when that happens.

Numerous findings of water ice have been made on Mars, which means it can be collected from the Martian envirionment. The primary ways perchlorates decompose is from exposure to water and heat. Perchlorates are also generally water soluble, which is one of the reasons they are harmful to human health.

Together, this suggests Martian regolith that is loaded with perchlorate is a potentially valuable source of easily extracted mineral-derived oxygen gas, which would be essential for a manned Martian colony mission. The extraction of this gas from the perchlorates would leave alkali-earth chloride salts behind in the reactor vessel, but these have other industrial uses, such as the production of hydrochloric acid, and the production of vinyl-chlorides.

Extraction of the perchlorates from the regolith through this industrial process would produce an abundance of potentially useful mineral dust to use hydroponically, or, if the composition is useful and fit for purpose, as raw material for sintered brick and basalt fiber.

The elements in low abundance are nitrogen and phosphorus. These are the real sticking points, from my understanding. The only sources of these would be from radiological processes, or from importation from earth. Both represent a very significant scarcity that would make the idea of 'colonization' infeasible.

Lunar regolith spectrometer data suggests that lunar soil does contain phosphorus, but in very low concentrations. Carbon and nitrogen are scarce.

The majority of publications about Martian regolith is about geochemical evidence of hydrolysis and water-erosion evidence, and talk about perchlorate levels. I have not seen good datasets detailing phosphate levels, or nitrogen sources. They may exist, but I have not seen it discussed much.

In 1790, the US population was 94.9% rural. There is no country. in the world today that rural -- Burundi, which looks like blanks spot in the world at night satellite picturs, is 88% rural.

The largest city at the time was New York, with a population of 33,000. Northern Manhattan was near-wilderness, mid-town was farms and country houses.

In 1790 the US was. country you could "police" with sheriffs and volunteer posses, largely to keep the peace. If you got robbed, you hired a private thief catcher. This works in a 95% rural country with just 3.4 million inhabitants. It would be chaos in a country 87x larger.

8GB is plenty of RAM for what most users use their laptops for, if the OS doesn't gobble it up with background tasks. Probably be a good idea to steer clear of Chrome as a browser on these things.

It's actually more like an iPhone 16 Pro runing MacOS in a laptop form factor. Apple basically rummaged through their parts box and pulled out a mobile CPU that'll deliver 50% more single core performance than what's in a high-end Chromebook with only 80% of the power draw. And Apple's got *massive* economies of scale on those parts, so they can afford to deliver a lot of bang for the buck.

The only place the Neo appears to falls short is in RAM, but this is *not* a power user machine, it's for basic office tasks and multimedia consumption. Realistically 8GB is plenty for many users.

In any case, the desktop isn't the center of most users's universe anymore; the switchboard of their life is their smartphone. This is a gateway drug to MacOS IOS integration, and eventually onto the upgrade treadmill. Users will switch seamlewssly between their iPhones and Neos all day long, with data on iCloud and iMusic etc., and when it comes time to upgrade their phone or their laptop, they won't be *stuck* exactly, but if they leave the reservation they lose a lot. But they certainly could upgrade to a *much nicer* Macbook....

It's no wonder the other laptop makers are sitting up and taking notice. Apple has set up a one way conversion ratchet for people tempted by a really nice and perfectly adequate entry level machine at an entry level price.Nobody else has the vertical integration -- chip foundries to device manufacturing, to software platform -- spanning desktop and phones that's needed to do this.

Anyone who's watched a house go up has marveled at how quickly the framing goes up, then how long it takes everything else to get done.

Framing is about 1/l4 of the build time for a house. The *labor* for framing is less than 10% of the build cost. If the machine cost *nothing*, and framed the building *instantaneously*, those are hard limits on how much faster and cheaper the house building robot could make the process: about 25% faster with about a 10% cost reduction. But the machine wouldn't work instantaneously, nor would it be free.

There already is a better way of doing this. You prefabricate the house in units, ship them to the site, then bolt the units together. The modules could be completely finished at the factory. Savings over traditional construction would be substantial -- 40%. The problem is, can you build houses people want to buy and which local building codes will allow you to live in. If you throw out expectations that a house looks like a house a child would draw with crayons, you can build a really nice. So with prefab houses you either have things that look like mobile homes; or things that look like they were designed by a scandanavian architect. Houses that *look* like mid-range, hand-built homes are a tough nut to crack.

There was a movement among architects to use pre-fabricated construction to solve the problem of housing returning GIs after WW2. It didn't catch on as the kind of democratizing mass produced housing the movement envisioned because people wanted a house that looked hand-built. But if you can get over that, it produced some really great houses. One of the more famous examples (although not completely pre-fabricated) is the Eames House. There's a company from that period that's still in business, but they pre-fabricate million dollar luxury homes, not mass produced housing.

The obstacles to prefabricated houses are regulatory, which is why it can't reach the middle of the market. Anti-mobile home rule discourage really cheap pre-fabricated houses, but high end producers can afford to jump through the regulatory hoops. For mid-range houses, the regulatory burden outweighs the economic advantage of prefabrication. This could allow a framing robot to have a niche, although as I pointed out it won't save much money on the build cost.

THis is true. You also get a better understanding for AI's limitations, familiarity of where to be skeptical, and a feel for when a context is losing its mind. I like to put it this way: nobody who can't outthink an AI should be using an AI for anything important.

It wouldn't be news if you looked at their terms of service -- which you should. The ToS explicitly say they use a combination of automated systems, human review, and reports to identify and investigate violations of their usage terms, including violence, abuse, fraud, impersonation, disinformation, foreign influence campaigns , abusive sexual content, and academic dishonesty. This includes "anonymous" sessions that are saved for a minimum of 30 days. You have no expectation of privacy from the provider's compliance teams.

This is *absolutely* standard among the major online players. So why not use a local AI workstation with a couple of big-ass GPU cards in it to run the campaign? That's what they *should* have done. But the major online players like ChatGPT and Claude are much better at realistic content generation than the widely available local models you can run.

What they should have done is design and run the compaign on a local AI workstation, and used the local workstation to generate prompts they could feed into burner accounts on public services like ChatGPT and Claude. But they got lazy and ran the *whole* operation in ChatGPT, right in plain fiew of the OpenAI compliance teams the ToS they evidently didn't read would have told them were there. They even did *performance reviews* in the same account.

Remember folks, these "spooks" are just mid-level paper-pushers in an opaque communist bureacuracy. You can never discount inertia in such an environment. Because this was something new, they might even have had trouble getting the purchase of some high end GPUs approved.

I don't hate Trump. I pity him. No matter how much shit he slaps his name on, it won't fill the hole is daddy left in him. But people that damaged shouldn't be let anywhere near power.

Well, no. It's true you can't buy books for the purposes of scanning them *and then making them available online* (Hachette v. Internet Archive). Scanning them for AI training is not settled law in every Federal District, although in at least one that has been ruled transformative and therefore allowable (Bartz v Anthropic, Northern District of California).

Anthropic famously bought a lot of copyrighted books and scanned them to ingest into its model training corpus. Arguably they aren't violating copyright because what they are doing is *transformative* -- turning words into a statistical map of word associations.

But what China is doing by inferring the structure of that map doesn't touch on *any* kind of intellectual property of Anthropics. Sure, the map is a trade secret, but they've exposed that trade secret through their public interface. It's not human created so it's not copyrightable. Even if that map were patentable, which it probably isn't, it's not patented.

The worst you can say is that China is violating the service's terms of service, which may have no legal force there.

As a lifelong cyclist, I agree in principle. The problem is over the last seventy-five years we have rearchitected the very geographic fabric of society to make *solving* our transportation problems with bike and public transit impossible.

Before WW2, Dad would leave the apartment and walk or take a trolley to work (usually in the same city neighborhood) while Ma "kept house" -- managed cooking, clearning, childcare, and the family's community and social engagement. In the 1950s and 60s, instead of an apartment, it'd be a suburban house. Ma would drop Pa off at the kiss and ride.

Today Mom and Dad both have jobs they have to get to, usually in *different* suburban employment areas; they can locate to make the commute easy for one, but they keep changing jobs every couple of years while their long-term wealth is being put into a geographically fixed asset: their house. They are financially anchored to their house as their jobs move around the region.

Car-dependency is baked into the very fabric of society, in a way you can't fix with transportation policy or projects--not without decades of projects. But we have reached the limits of the car-dependency model; we can't fix traffic by adding marginal car capacity as has been repeatedly demonstrated by freeway projects that fail to fix traffic because we're in an equillibrium between commute times and job selection.

Transit and bike infrastructure won't fix this, but they *can* make marginal improvements in the traffic situation by taking cars off the road for the minority of people who can use these alternatives at this particular point in their lives. I think e-bikes are going to be key. I personally wouldn't consider a ten mile commute by bike on roads shared with cars a barrier to commuting by bike, but most people wouldn't attempt it. E-bikes on bike infrastructure can make a ten mile commute practical for *normal* people, and take a significant number of cars off congested roads. Public transit could help, but again in a marginal, opportunistic way. In Europe or the US Northeast where car-dependency was overlaid on existing dense urban fabrics, there's a lot of opportunity for major transit projects. But for American cities in the West which have *no* center of mass to build around, solving car-dependency is likely a Moon-shot level project.

Well, that's one hypothesis. However since they saw a significant difference in the population where the social media apps were removed, then if your hypothesis is true, the data would suggest that delivering the service as a native app rather than a web app must have some harmful effect in itself. An alternative hypothesis is that their application usage patterns changed when the apps were removed.

It's not altogether far fetched that web-delivered apps have a different psychological effect than native smartphone apps, because native smartphone apps have greater access to the system for tracking and notifications. Native apps also offer different features than their web versions. This is why I use Facebook via a browser, because the Facebook native app is insufferably intrusive, constantly trying to get your attention. It means, however, I can't use Facebook's chat function.

Back in the 80's vendors promised companies a "paperless office", but cynics noted that the equipment sold always included printers.

Now we're looking at a promise of a post-human-labor era, delivered by armies of human drones performing mountains fo soul-crushing labor.