Alcun Atirutan BBS

@i @deutrino @pro @Moon I have 2gb of swap on there, but it seems to kill it before it exhausts the swap. I've tuned the memory usage on postgres down a bit now though.

@Moon @i @deutrino @pro My puny 2gb instance has no chance then, haha.

@pro @i @deutrino @Moon Ever since I moved off OpenBSD over to Debian, I've been having problems with either beam or postgres getting hit by the OOM killer. I guess I need to do more tuning.

@LoganFive I don't know how Commodore users could tolerate some of the weirdness of their system... We didn't have to hit the play button on our tape drives over in the Atari space, the computer controlled everything on that, even stopping the tape once the program was loaded.

@benjedwards @sofiav If you didn't have an ISP, I remember that it had some stuff for finding dialup ISPs in some versions of windows?

@benjedwards I mean... You can still log off. Just unplug your router. Depending on your OS, many things will still work. :) Updates probably won't. Installing new software probably won't, but you could still pop open a text editor and program as long as you don't need stackoverflow.

@stuff @gabriel @Moon PT Cruiser was the best iteration of the Dodge Neon.

@TechConnectify @jeffeb3 I can do that in a traditional grocery store though, because my family has nailed down which product to buy first, which to buy second if that's out of stock, etc.

@TechConnectify There's only one variety of peanut butter among the 20 or so at the store that I enjoy that also has low sodium though. I suspect at Trader Joe's there would be 0. I don't know though, they aren't open anywhere near me.

The translation for Useless Ponko is finally done, cute manga.

@winter @requiem Eh, we'll see. I guess you'll never see more than one or two SLS launches per year because of how ridiculously expensive it is.

@winter @requiem SLS may have an advantage on fuel cleanness, but the costs of building a new one, such as the pollution released while mining the minerals required to build it, and smelting them probably exceeds the pollution released by a SH launch.

I believe though that part of it is that it's easier to produce methane from solar power and CO2 in the martian atmosphere than it would be to produce other fuels there.

@winter @requiem The merlin using Kerosene is far more polluting though than Methane. In the long run, it will be less polluting than the SLS. After all, every SLS launched will drop debris into the ocean, while once they get the design down, no more SH boosters will do the same.

@requiem @winter Still early days on that, SH is too early, and Falcon 9 is a medium lift, it was revolutionary when it was made for its low cost and reusability, but it's fairly pedestrian beyond that. SH will be where they actually move ahead when it's complete.

@winter @requiem (It makes sense that they wouldn't put 27 RS-27s on a disposable rocket, especially when they cost 146 million each, compared to Raptor 2's 250k each.)

@winter @requiem And were there 27 RS-25's on the shuttle or SLS? That's what would be required to equate the thrust of the Superheavy booster, and this is what I'm talking about, total thrust of the rocket.

@winter @requiem You're forgetting all of their experiments with Falcon 1 getting the engine design down, The stuff that they're experimenting on with Starship and Superheavy are more akin to their first Falcon 1 launches trying to get the engine design down, and again, this is a much more aggressive and novel engine design than the fairly pedestrian engine that the falcon designs use. You also have to remember all of the landing failures before they had a success. They were planning on doing Soft landing attempts in the water with the booster in this case.

@requiem @winter This seems like more of a rant against Musk than against Starship. Again, I don't care at all for the guy, all I want to see is results.

Nasa did not make a rocket this large 50 years ago with slide rules. Nasa did not make a full cycle engine 50 years ago with slide rules, Nasa did not make a rocket that could land back at its tower 50 years ago with slide rules. These are all novel things that they're experimenting with here. Russia did try to make a full cycle engine and failed, and Russia tried to make rockets this powerful and failed.

@winter @requiem If you look at its early days, it also had quite a few launch failures, it was also significantly less aggressive. Falcon 9 had numerous failures in their landing system for example before they got it right. Starship is both trying to make a viable full cycle engine, and trying to make the largest, highest thrust rocket ever made, but also trying to get the landing system that requires higher precision than the Falcon with a larger rocket down at the same time. It's not the least bit of a surprise that it's going to take it more trial and error before it is finished. They are following the same method they used for the Falcon though, with their destructive tests on Landing until they get it right.

@requiem @winter Normally when someone says "the rich" they are implying something that costs $50k or more, rather than being able to go around the planet for $1.5k, or go to the other end of the country for $200.