And you've just explained how you have absolutely no understanding of how spacex functions and why and why it's a good thing.

This is how they land rockets on barges at sea and no one else can, or thought it was even possible.

No, I'm not an engineer (and that's an Ad Hominem fallacy). But for the love of god, SpaceX is a terrible company because they launched a rocket with INTENTIONALLY missing heat shield points to see what would happen (edit: all while knowing if certain heat shield tiles failed it would guarantee the complete destruction of the ship, that would obliterate any crew you're oh so concerned about in this test phase!), and even launched their rocket with wing flaps that they suspected would be destroyed by the hot plasma and had already made changes in future designs! God forbid they test a ablative concrete launch pad that survived all their real world tests and showed it should work in models.

This is a TEST rocket program.

The goal of the program is to figure out what does and doesn't work.

There are numerous ~~zero~~ single failure points all over the ship currently as they figure things out.

Using the concrete was a way to test if they could set up a launch pad easier. ALL their tests and modeling proved it should work.

Tests and modeling aren't the end all be all though and sometimes things you don't or can't anticipate happen and then you remodel with the new info. This isn't a high school project, it's rocket science.

There was nothing bullshit about testing it out.

The goal of IFT1 was don't blow up the entire stage 0. They didn't blow up the entire stage 0. They learned the concrete doesn't work, but also hopefully they were able to learn WHY. And if they found a why that why may lead to it being attempted again in the future maybe even by someone else.

OLED display to reduce power and simply show a directional dot with size to indicate distance?

They got approval from the fish and wildlife agency before launching with the deluge system

https://www.tpr.org/technology-entrepreneurship/2023-11-16/faa-gives-ok-to-spacex-for-second-starship-launch

Published November 16, 2023 at 9:00 AM CST

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has approved SpaceX’s next Starship launch, just hours after the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) concluded its assessment of the rocket’s launch infrastructure.

The FAA gave the company a launch license Wednesday afternoon, saying Starship and its new launch infrastructure would have “no significant environmental changes” for its second launch.

FWS stated that SpaceX’s water deluge system, meant to suppress the flames and sound from the rocket’s 33 engines, would produce the same amount of water from an average rainfall. The agency does not expect the water to change the mud flats’ salinity or affect shorebird habitat.

*emphasis mine.

Flight 2 was on November 18th, 2 days after they get approval for the deluge system.

Edit: further, spacex has replied to this and said the following (among other things as well)

https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1823080774012481862

SpaceX worked with the Texas Commission of Environmental Quality (TCEQ) throughout the build and test of the water deluge system at Starbase to identify a permit approach. TCEQ personnel were onsite at Starbase to observe the initial tests of the system in July 2023, and TCEQ’s website shows that SpaceX is covered by the Texas Multi-Sector General Permit.

We only use potable (drinking) water in the system’s operation. At no time during the operation of the deluge system is the potable water used in an industrial process, nor is the water exposed to industrial processes before or during operation of the system.

We send samples of the soil, air, and water around the pad to an independent, accredited laboratory after every use of the deluge system, which have consistently shown negligible traces of any contaminants. Importantly, while CNBC's story claims there are “very large exceedances of the mercury” as part of the wastewater discharged at the site, all samples to-date have in fact shown either no detectable levels of mercury whatsoever or found in very few cases levels significantly below the limit the EPA maintains for drinking water.

that wouldn't even make sense since the glass was never "bulletproof" and if you're gonna hit him in the face, you gotta go through the glass.

Inflation reduction act.

Early on there was talks that the act was going to require OEMs to be union shops to get the benefits.

Then the bill was released and it was something like $4500 for everyone and and additional $3000 if your factory had union labor.

Then when it got to the senate or house, the union portion got removed and it was $7500 for everyone.

Is that because they don't have the info from the HSA?

I thought the point of systems like this is that they prepopulate everything they know, and then you fill in the rest?

That way it's quicker, and you dont accidentally miss something they know about and get in trouble with the IRS wasting everyone's time?

The deeper they get, I imagine the more ammunition stashes they'll pass. I wonder how much they've been able to claim.

When they deny something like this because of claimed flaws in study, do they give detailed descriptions of the flaws and help (maybe for a fee) the petitioner make a new study?

Or do they leave it vague enough so they can just perpetually say it's flawed?

Nowadays, a lot of taxes are being paid on tips because they happen on the payment terminals.

If you get audited on those and didn't pay them it's a slam dunk win for the IRS.

So a change like this could be somewhat substantial now.

Up next, submersible drones.