« first day (1640 days earlier)      last day (1220 days later) » 

1:48 AM
I think making your score an issue unto itself is a bit of a deviation from the purpose of the voting system (which if I remember correctly is meant to be an indicator of the quality of the answer itself, rather than the other reasons mentioned.
 
 
2 hours later…
3:32 AM
@uhoh Nope! Fake internet pointsa re the new bitcoin!
 
4:09 AM
-2
Q: Are unsourced yet "authoritative-sounding" answers proper here?

uhohThis answer sounds very authoritative and knowledgeable, and contains several numerical values. And yet there are no sources for these numbers. How can future readers know if this is spot-on accurate, or pure speculation? I'm concerned about going after max-rep by any means necessary versus pos...

 
posted on January 12, 2018 by William Graham

India’s Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle returned to flight Friday, four months after the rocket suffered…

 
 
1 hour later…
5:17 AM
@geoffc are there known cases of people speculating on users' reputation scores? I know there are on-line markets where you can "bet" or speculate on all kinds of things, but I don't know of any for "SE reputation futures"!
And if there is a SE-rep to bitcoin converter, please let me know! Maybe I should re-think my bounty strategies!
4
Q: Why is TESS' high gain antenna made of undulating BLACK fabric rather than metal?

uhoh above: from Facebook, then annotated. There is an excellent review of the design of the TESS spacecraft in G. R. Richter et al. Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems 1(1), 014003 (Jan–Mar 2015) PDF available at MIT here. The text of t...

Now has a +400 bounty.
Legacy anti-gaming algorithms force up each bounty on a question.
 
5:37 AM
 
 
4 hours later…
9:44 AM
@uhoh You gotta learn when I am joking around man. :)
 
 
3 hours later…
12:34 PM
@ReactingToAngularVues Ahh - drones will not be able to hover effectively above atmosphere (and by effectively, I really mean efficiently). Drones are relatively inefficient anyway, compared to satellites, when it comes to maintaining altitude, and at such high altitudes, they become less efficient
 
 
2 hours later…
2:32 PM
@geoffc OK, I'm glad to hear it :-)
 
2:46 PM
Kim has learned, that the answer is 'most of the time;.
 
3:29 PM
@kimholder Was just looking over the moderator chat. It's amazing how much more active it was when you were a mod.
 
@PearsonArtPhoto heheheheh - people could take that the wrong way.
@geoffc i'm not sure, but i have a feeling there is a curve to learning when @uhoh is joking around too.
 
People can take anything the wrong way...
 
yeah. the moderator chat had a special feel. all secret and everything. it was a good place to talk sometimes.
 
4:07 PM
@kimholder Cultural differences suck! One world culture, mine of course. :) Converesly, fun to screw up in multiple cultures.
 
 
2 hours later…
6:00 PM
Roadster soon to be launched, video of it in action!
 
6:24 PM
I'm sure you heard, but another delay in static fire.
The Falcon Heavy was lowered into the horizontal position overnight as engineers troubleshoot the issue that caused SpaceX to call off the first attempt to hot fire the powerful rocket.

The test firing has been tentatively rescheduled for 5-10pm EST (2200-0300 GMT) Saturday.
 
Apparently a hold down clamp was balky! (Teslerati article, will post, openi n a tab to oread still). I assumed it would be GSE. Go figure.
 
Well, they could have just launched it...
And yes, I know the hold clamps are used even for a nominal launch, albeit briefly.
 
Hehe
 
Seriously though, if they do the static fire soon, I wonder what could hold them from launching, assuming they don't find any issues.
I'm meaning launching in a week or so.
 
Money Quote:
According to Orlando’s News 13, the attempt was scrubbed only after one of eight hold-down clamps showed signs of bugs.
Overhead shot of Heavy on LC39A.
#DEIMOS2 caught #FalconHeavy rocket at Kennedy Space Center's pad 39A during yesterday's static fire test attempt! #SpaceX #StaticFire
 
6:36 PM
That's a nice photo!
 
A few degress off vertical would have been better.
 
6:54 PM
True.
That's actually pretty good for a satellite image.
 
Commerical too!
 
It seems like a, what, sub-meter pixel resolution.
Would be hard to see a person I suppose, but...
What I would have been impressed is if they could have taken the picture when firing.
But that's a really tall order...
 
Timing it would seem implacible.
 
Even for a 1 second launch window, that would be tricky.
Having a satellite overhead is rare...
 

« first day (1640 days earlier)      last day (1220 days later) »