lukealization

A wholly reductionist comment that misstates my opinions. Believe it or not I think there’s an optimal space between the environmental conservatism I’m espousing and charging forward into an unregulated and environmentally destructive bliss that doesn’t result in being opposed to any form of new development ever.

Aircraft use hydrocarbons which require similarly intensive chemical processes to create the fuels from the same constituent ingredients as the Sabatier reaction.

I agree space is cool. But why do you think the "space is cool" mantra is more important than ensuring that for the 8 billion humans that call this planet home—we have somewhere sustainable and safe to live?

Your asteroid mining for profit is arguably meaningless if we have no ozone layer.

Why isn't SpaceX doing that then? Why isn't any airline doing that then? Oh look, it's cheaper to use refined natural gas from a well. That's why. In the absence of either properly priced externalities, the market will always choose the cheapest option—Sabatier-generated Methane is not remotely comparable in price to fossil nat gas.

Mentioning theoretical solutions doesn't help if they will never be used practically.

Tell me why I shouldn't be concerned about thousands of starships launching from Earth and emitting multiple megatons of Carbon Dioxide in the fragile upper atmosphere? Some studies indicate emissions here are significantly more impactful, and can also damage the Ozone layer as well.

Any answers shouldn't consist of "well it's a fraction of what the aviation industry emits" because _the entire point_ of Starship is to scale-up to aviation-like operations.

Hi there. Where did you purchase those from?

And botulinum toxin only needs to exist in microscopic quantities to cause injury and death—would you eat a jar contaminated with it?

Satellites are significantly more metal-rich than meteors—also it's clear with Starship and multiple large (10,000+) satellite constellations that the total deorbited mass annually is only going to grow.

You sound exactly like the type who would defend ULA and other rocketry incumbents when SpaceX was a tiny startup.

Why are we so intent on dismissing the little players here?

The OP nor the study made no indication that the two were related — merely that they correlate.

> Apps can host code.

You say that like it's a good thing.

Possibly inadvisable, but you can disable SIP in High Sierra by using `csrutil` from the recovery OS (kind of moot, admittedly, as you'll need to be in recovery to trash the files that the author has mentioned, but you can at least make this setting permanent if you're willing to live with SIP disabled).

> And with Clover bootloader, it's even easier than it's ever been

And it's about to start getting far more difficult too. In my opinion, we've reached "peak hackintosh". Now with additional features which run on ARM chips and custom hardware complementing macOS more and more, it's going to become increasingly untenable to replicate the full experience going forward.

TouchID & TouchBar with BridgeOS on the MacBooks was the first step. Hey Siri on the iMac Pro is the next rung up. How long until we see FaceID on the Mac, or much further down the road, macOS running on ARM?

There's two JS libraries using the term "ristretto", we've all heard of mocha. "espresso" seems to be a disused node.js tooling library, similarly, "flat white" is a disused CMS, "latte" is a failed CoffeeScript competitor. "Americano" seems to be a slightly more used tooling repository.

I guess the less than inspiring names "short black" and "long black" are available? :)