Normal non sharing? I don't know anyone who doesn't share!

Depends on the contract, for most old space contracts NASA takes operations and so should have more ownership, but for new space contracts the company takes most operations and so has a right to control their assets.

Last time I use opera browser was on my Wii.

What the heck is opera?

I use ChatGPT almost daily. My comment was specifically in the context of asking something like the capital of a country or something. The functionality ChatGPT does I don't see as a search replacement but something entirely different I don't think we've quite comprehended yet.

I find that messed up... Calculators perform busy work for us, which is fine, but in writing an essay you have to think and formulate your own thoughts, which is part of the essence of being human... If we automate this what are we really doing here?

I want an option without machine learning. Someone will eventually figure out how to corrupt it.

Yeah, but then all the "big browsers" copied most of those features and eventually did a better job of it.

I didn't mind Opera so much 20+ years ago, but it just never gained enough traction for me to care about as a user or developer.

TIL Opera is still a thing...

>By his reasoning all gynecologists offices are mob connected.

Are they not?

Depends on the kind of contract

All these tests being successful is so awesome, but at the same time I'm just over here going "can it be launch day yet already!?"

The wait for the first launch attempt has been and continues to be brutal lol

Chinese AI ... what could possibly go wrong?

Thanks for the heads up so that I can avoid it.

lol "same service". Boeing cant' even manage that. They are years behind delivering crews to the ISS despite getting more money initially and even managing to go back to NASA and get an extra billion.

They need multiple engines for landing. An empty Falcon 9 is already too light to hover or descend on a single Merlin engine at minimum throttle.

Both Starship and SuperHeavy can hover and descend with multiple Raptor engines firing. This gives them engine out capability while landing and a much safer landing profile. There's no need to perform a suicide burn where you only have a brief moment to get it right or you are crashing.

> If not takeoff and max q, for sure during landing.

They aren't turning any engines off during launch. Max Q doesn't' require a greater than 40% reduce in thrush.

Engines are turned off during separation. Then some are turned back on for the boost back burn and maybe a reentry burn. Then finally some are used for the landing burn.

And if NASA contracts a company to develop a system you think the IP for that system should belong to the company?

I guess if you don't consider paying for services yet to be developed as funding research, then yeah- I suppose that didn't happen.

Im glad bing is getting an upgrade. Tired of ads on my googke searches. At least bing will make them more engaging.

Yes, it’s a government agency and allocated government funding. It’s then up to NASA to use that funding, such as investing in and buying contracts from private companies.

NASA isn't privately owned.

>you accepted government funding to research

It'd be nice if you actually pointed to this "research funding". I looked over and all the money SpaceX was given by NASA was "service contracts" which are fulfilled or being fulfilled, or the Commercial Crew Program. In this one, SpaceX didn't receive money in the first round. In the second, seed money was first given to a few companies like BlueOrigin, Boeing and SpaceX to develop technologies for crewed vehicles. In SpaceX's case, their proposal was making their ALREADY EXISTING Dragon capsule human-rated, and finishing its abort system. The Falcon 9 had already flown various resupply missions to the ISS by then. The rest of their funding was NASA paying SpaceX to render services, or specifically making changes to SpaceX's vehicles for NASA's purposes

NASA gets the public funding. They choose how to allocate it, such as contracts to launch companies.

Then why do they need public funding?

A functional analogy would be if you accepted government funding to research and develop a new construction process that you'd then patent.