I am surprised at no mention of 2600. Kilobaud would be the other magazine from that time I read voraciously (along with all the computer ones mentioned).

I was under a court order not to have "criminal hacking materials" in my house or dorm room. Besides, there wasn't that much decent info in it. At least in the early days.

I still have that Byte August 1981 issue in my office. I may have the Forth issue as well.

Bonus points if you have a copy of Loeliger's "Threaded Interpretive Languages" as well as the FORTH issue.

The FSF has specifically stated that 7(b) does not apply to branding and requiring such is a violation of 7(b) that may be removed.

The branding requirement is a further restriction because that isn’t one of the permitted changes by 7(b) - it is neither an author attribution nor a ALN.

That will just create another dead fork that no one works on.

LibreOffice exists because the devs of OpenOffice forked it. If the project leadership now ejects the devs, I think that the new fork will be the living one.

I wish there had been some comparison to how the Dragon toilet works.

That’s incorrect — it is both. That’s why orbital refueling is so important to Starship’s future.

There is no world in which lunar mining and smelting economically produces anything useful on Earth.

I was describing a scenario where the teleoperated machines were used to build a base on the Moon with in situ produced materials, not one where materials are sold as export to Earth.

But I'm curious to hear why you think that it will always be uneconomical to produce refined metals on the Earth and transport them to Earth for further manufacturing?

It seems like a logical near term thing that we're going to have to do to reduce carbon emissions and other environmental damage. Mining and refining ores are both energy intensive and highly ecologicaly damaging.

NASA provided SpaceX some money as a startup to bet they could just start commercial space, and they won to the tune of saving millions of dollars. There was never massive subsidies and there isn’t any subsidies at all today.

This is a lie. SpaceX has received at least 3.5 billion dollars from NASA for contracts. You can claim these aren’t subsidies but they are direct funding that allowed SpaceX to build up revenue streams like Starlink using the launch vehicles paid for by NASA. It’s the exact same funding model that Boeing takes advantage of. SpaceX would not exist without NASA. They’re collaborators, not competitors.

But that explosion would have cost one tenth the cost a single SLS launch and the next one would go a little further. And eventually you would be flying the most reliable rocket in history more frequently than any other rocket for one tenth the cost of the competition.

This works for getting things to LEO. This doesn't scale well as the distance increases. You can't keep launching shit to the moon, crashing it over and over, until you get it right.