In order for licking the rocks to help on the test, he must have already tasted them before.

This is why I (a Georgian) am doing early in-person voting and not mail-in voting. Between the tactic you mentioned, the possibility of disqualification due to a bullshit “signature mismatch,” and sabotage from DeJoy (who is still the fucking Postmaster General because Biden apparently hates the USPS as much as he does and failed to make board appointees who would remove him), mail-in voting is unacceptably risky unless you have no other choice. And that’s sad, terrifying, and – most importantly – fucking infuriating.

Removed by mod

Take the invoice to the insurance and ask for an adjustment. Good luck.

I’m feeling like bees, but vacillating between Nicholas Cage and Oprah:

Al Gore, too (never mind the EC vote, which he also would have won if not for the first Republican coup).

Good luck, they’d have to ban nuclear subs and no nation wants to throw that protection away.

No, that doesn’t follow. I’m pretty sure nuclear subs – or nuclear aircraft carriers, for that matter – rarely dock at commercial ports, and there’s no reason (other than hypocrisy, which is not relevant) that a country can’t decide to bar nuclear ships from commercial ports while still allowing them at military naval bases.

a thorium powered container ship

If the experience of the NS Savannah is anything to go by, the major hurdle that ship is going to face is Greenpeace etc. fomenting irrational anti-nuclear hysteria until it’s banned from so many ports that it’ll be too difficult to operate it profitably. I hope I’m wrong and I wish them luck.

I was under the impression that a “rocket” does not include the payload.

Sure, I think you’re totally correct… if the part with the engine is separable from the part with the payload. But with the Space Shuttle, that isn’t the case unless you’re limiting yourself to talking about the SRBs. The orbiter is a spaceplane and that makes it weird, but its main engines are rocket engines (as opposed to a hybrid ramjet or something) and it launches vertically, so I think it’s still fair to also call it a rocket.

Or as another example, consider the problem scaled aaaaaaaall the way down to something like this:

Is the whole thing a “rocket,” or does that only describe the bottom half and it’s called something else from the payload bay up?

Remember, unless we’re talking about Enterprise, “space shuttle rockets” includes the orbiter itself. The orbiter’s main engines were where all that fuel from the external tank was going, after all! From that perspective, I would argue that the main “space shuttle rocket” was definitely much more complex than the Super Heavy booster, because the crew stuff, cargo stuff, spaceplane stuff, etc. was integrated into it.

I feel like your criticism of the shuttle system being less reusable than advertised might have been more applicable if we were talking about the Soviet Buran (which indeed used expendable Energia rockets to reach orbit), not NASA’s shuttles.

Peak oil was about conventional oil. Had we not discovered other sources and methods for extraction then we likely would have run out. And running out isn’t accurate, it’s just that oil becomes harder to extract and thus too expensive for regular uses.

In other words, we did hit Peak Oil and that’s what caused the development of things like fracking, oil sands, and deep ocean drilling.

Between the orbiter (reused), the boosters (reused), and the external fuel tank (not reused), which parts are not “just a small part” (in terms of technology/complexity/cost, not physical size)?

A significant portion of it is also literally about making friends with the NPCs.

Reported for credibleposting

Stardew Valley

I am all idiots on this blessed day!

We are all idiots on this blessed day.

They would literally be shooting the tyrants.

Non-file based computing is a highly unexplored design space.

No it isn’t; that’s what databases are.