Feb 182022
 

Another hour on the line with tech support *seems* to have cleared up a few issues… the error message *should* be gone (a plugin to measure statistics is screwed up somehow, so I had to ditch it), the header image *should* be back (a problem caused by the *last* problem, with the HTTS-HTTP thing). A potential issue remains of some people apparently not able to access the Disqus commenting. I don’t know how widespread that is, but I do know comments are reduced of late. Could be any number of explanations for that, of course. Today’s HTTPS fix *might* fix the Disqus issue, dunno.

If you can comment, great (especially if you recently *couldn’t* but now can, lemme know). If not, maybe drop me an email or, if you’re so inclined, tweet about it at my (gah) twitter.

 

 Posted by at 1:52 pm
Feb 172022
 

“Moonfall” is, hands down, the silliest movie I’ve seen in a *long* time. That said, it’s also fairly entertaining.

You *have* to go into this one with your higher brain functions turned off. It’s not so much that they got the science wrong; it’s more like they took a look at the science and said “FU, Science!” and did what they wanted to do anyway. The moon has a white dwarf inside it. A Space Shuttle solid rocket booster just… shuts off for no reason. The Moon gets close enough to scrape the atmosphere and, somehow, gains a surface gravity as great as that of the Earth… and yet the Earth isn’t torn asunder. The US and Europeans are able to cobble together a manned lunar SLS mission in days; and then NASA is able to pull a Space Shuttle out of a museum, stack it up at Vandenberg, and launch it with a ground crew of *two* *guys.* A guy is able to land a completely powered-down space shuttle simply by twiddling some valves. Gravity and orbital dynamics follow the Star Wars model at the best of times.

Yeah, no.

Still, it was *largely* entertaining. There are a lot of plot-unnecessary diversions to The Folks At Home, with the now expected divorced parents, kids, hapless stepfathers. Some editing could chop those out and make a tight little hour of quality splosion-riffic entertainment.

Lots of pretty disasterpalooza.

The movie ends with a hook for a sequel. But given that the production budget was $140 million and int he first two weeks its brought in around $17 million domestically… yeah, I’m not betting on a sequel happening. The local theater is now down to two showing a day, and there were a grand total of two people in the theater when I was there. Well, at least the mask mandate thing could be ignored…

 Posted by at 7:02 pm
Feb 162022
 

In March of 1961, “Space World” magazine published a few articles about what the future would look like thanks to the onrushing new technologies of the space age. It is… well, it’s wrong.

The article is jam-packed with predictions of a glorious technological and economic future to be brought about by the Space Age. And from the standpoint of 1961, it probably made sense: technology was advancing by leaps and bounds, the budget for NASA was beginning to explode, overall space and related science spending by both government and industry were shooting upwards. It *should* have been a glorious new age. But the experts did not count on a few things. Viet Nam, for example and, worse, LBJs “Great Society” economic and social suppression/dystopia promotion programs.

Some of the predictions for 1971:

1) The “Space Industry” would be the biggest industry in America

2) The “middle class” would be working high-paying skilled jobs and would make up 80% of the population

3) Skyscrapers would dwarf the Empire State Building, using girders made from beryllium, tantalum and niobium

4) Tape recorders would be the size of a cigarette

5) You could easily send a fax from, say, New York to Australia. You’d scan the page, beam it up to a satellite passing overhead, the satellite would store the scan and, when it some time later passed over Australia, the fax would be beamed down. That’s… not how international satellite communications works, but OK.

6) There’d be cities in Antarctica

7) There’d be regular, routine and affordable suborbital rocket passenger transport. Such as from Antarctica to New York, several flights a day.

Amusingly, these predictions are considered likely to be too conservative; people would look back to the predictions and “wonder why the prophets of 1961 were so shortsighted.”

“Today it is rocket time, and the coming decade will carry us all into the Age of Astronautics.”

 

They could not have known that their glorious future would only last a small handful of years. By 1968, the Apollo program was already terminated, with no follow-on. And the maximum spending for NASA occurred only in 65-66 or so, peaking at about 4% of the federal budget. Imagine if the upward trend had continued to, say, 1970. Perhaps 6, maybe 8% of the federal budget. What a world it could have been.

Awww. I gave myself a sad.

Sigh.

The full-rez scan of the article has been uploaded to the 2022-02 APR Extras folder on Dropbox. This is available to all $4 and up Patrons and Subscribers. If you would like to help fund the acquisition and preservation of such things, along with getting high quality scans for yourself, please consider signing on either for the APR Patreon or the APR Monthly Historical Documents Program.




 

 Posted by at 11:51 pm
Feb 132022
 

Both the Right and Left Have Illiberal Factions. Which Is More Dangerous?

Starting off, they determine that the audience for “far right” content online is vastly greater than “far left:”

In terms of audience size, Hard Core Right illiberal sites averaged about 186 million visits monthly. That’s about 31 percent the size of the audience for sites representing the mainstream Right and 19 percent the size of the audience of mainstream Left sites. … Unlike the Hard Core Right illiberal sites, the audience for Left illiberal sites is miniscule. Left illiberal sites received a monthly average of about 2.5 million visits.

Which is about 1.3 percent the size of the Hard Core Right illiberal audience.

Let’s just assume for the sake of argument that their data is accurate, *and* that the size of the far right vs. far left can be accurately assessed based on the visits to public and clearly acknowledged extremist websites. Based on that, their judgement is that the far right is something like 76 times bigger/more dangerous than the far left. Their final conclusion:

Those of us who seek to conserve and defend American liberalism should act accordingly, which involves recognizing that the illiberal threat comes overwhelmingly from the right.

The threat comes “overwhelmingly from the right.”

Uh-huh.

Look at the last couple of years. The left can point to one single “riot” by right wingers that largely involved people milling about harmlessly in the halls of power, with a vanishingly small number of knuckleheads busting windows and acting the fool. But on the other hand… the left gave us summers of cities in flames, cops assassinated, Trump supporters ambushed and murdered, cities occupied, books burned, death, destruction, fire and filth.

If there are fifty times more far right types than far left, but the far left actually carries out fifty times more actual violence, doesn’t mean that the lefties are 2,500 times more dangerous per capita? Couple that with this:

No, antifa didn’t ‘infiltrate’ Black Lives Matter during the 2020 protests. But did it increase violence?

The summary *here* is that Antifa showing up is a clear indicator that a protest is going to involve violence, destruction, arrests and injuries… while far right groups showing up statistically does nothing to make a protest more or less violent. It’s almost like people visiting “far right” websites doesn’t actually say anything about whether or not they’re going to be actually violent. I’m reminded of all the moral panics about how Dungeons and Dragons is going to make kids into Satan worshippers, and how video games will make kids into violent psychopaths. Rather than basing the level of threat on what people read, how about basing it on what they *do*?

Plus, their methodology may well not be very good. Do their “far left” websites include Facebook and Twitter? The far right (the *real* far right) has to go to Daily Stormer and such because they’ll get kicked off FB and Twitter and the like. The far left, on the other hand, is welcome there.

 Posted by at 10:13 pm
Feb 132022
 

In the past couple years as I’ve been buried under a mountain of CAD drafting, I’ve also found myself with access to a lot of streaming content. So I’ve been watching a lot of old movies that I had never seen before… some good, some bad, a lot indifferent. A week ago I watched “The Good, The Bad and the Ugly;” a few days ago, “Pale Rider.” Those were good. Then yesterday I decided to give “Breakfast at Tiffany’s” a shot. Got less than halfway through it when I decided that, even as background noise, I had far better ways to waste my life.

Let’s get this bit out of the way. As y’all may know, I’m pretty anti-woke. But, *wow,* that trans-racial Mickey Rooney character was freakin’ *painful* to look at and listen to. Yeeeeeesh.

But that wasn’t my problem with the movie. The movie is about one “Holly Golightly,” who turns out to be an incredibly shallow, vapid, materialistic gold digger with no apparent redeeming value. That’s pretty much *exactly* the sort of thing I’m not interested in. And the movie was also *boring.* So somewhere around a third of the movie, a new character was introduced. I looked at him and went “Huh. Is that Buddy Ebsen? It looks like him, but the voice doesn’t sound like him.” So I looked on IMDB, and, yup, that was him. As for the voice, I went to the “trivia” section pf the IMDB page for the movie and tried to find reference to whether Ebsen was dubbed by someone else. I didn’t read that, but I did read this:

Audrey Hepburn said the scene where she throws Cat into the rainy street was the most distasteful thing she ever had to do on film.

Wat.

Quickly losing patience with the film, I looked up “breakfast at tiffany’s” and “cat” and “rain” on YouTube, and found the scene in question. It’s the ending scene of the film, and it shows Holly driving away in a taxi in the rain with her pet cat Cat. She gets in a huff for some reason, stops the taxi, opens the door, and puts the cat out onto the street and has the taxi driver drive away. She doesn’t actually throw the cat, but not only does she dump the cat, she dumps the cat onto a busy street; not only that, onto a busy rainy street. That results in this shot:

The main character of this movie casually discards a cat into the rain.

Nah.

ᚠᚢᚳk ᚣᚩᚢ, ᛒᛁᛏᚳᚻ

So, onto something else with more sympathetic characters.

 

 Posted by at 12:02 pm
Feb 092022
 

Weird thing is, apparently I did it before. I tried to sign up and was informed that the email address I planned to use was *already* associated with a twitter account. Huh. Musta been a good long while ago, as I have no recollection of that. (Anybody know how to figure out what the username associated with that might be?)

Anyway, my plan is to use it solely as a blog backup of sorts, and a way to maintain contact when next the blog goes belly up.

I guess this is me now:

Sigh.

 

And so the degradation begins. Soon, TikTok. And then an Only Fans. Uuuuuuuugh.

 Posted by at 6:10 pm
Feb 092022
 

A number of people earlier today noticed that up-ship.com and the blog both seemed to have vanished. This occurred promptly after IT fixed a *previous* issue, one where if you came to the site using “https” rather than “http” your browser gave you a security warning. Fix one problem, incur another, worse one. But things now seem to be back up and running.

But it will happen again. It *always* happens again.

So once again I’m faced with a dire prospect: signing on to some form of social media, such as twitter, as a way to maintain some sort of online presence the next time the blog goes kerblooey. Every time it happens, I get messages from people worried that I’ve yoinked the blog, or it has been hacked, or I’ve died. The second issue has happened before, and I do fully expect that one of these days I’ll die (I haven’t yet, but looking at the track record of humanity, the verified list of actual immortals is pretty thin)… but it’ll likely take more than a few days for my website to get scrubbed after I keel over.

So… anybody have preferences/suggestions as far as social media platforms? All I’m interested in is something where I can post links to the latest blog post, and “I’m not dead” updates when needed. Gettr? Gab? I tried Discord specifically for aerospaceprojectsreview blog alternative, but I quickly found that I didn’t much care for it. Twitter, irritating as it is, seems the most popular choice. Taking suggestions.

 Posted by at 2:42 pm
Feb 092022
 

Astronomers Discover First Quadruple Asteroid

130 Elektra is a potato-shaped rock about 160 miles along the long axis, and now it has been seen to have three moons, all a mile or more across, orbiting it. I’m not sure if that’s terribly useful from a scientific or industrial point of view… but long-term, it’d probably make the asteroid a neat place to live. A spherical transparent bubble around the asteroid, just very slightly smaller in diameter than the length of the asteroid, should hold in an atmosphere; where the asteroid intersects the sphere can be the polar airlocks for ships, cargo and people. The surface gravity would be a meager 0.001 G’s or so; probably enough to hold stuff more or less down on the surface, but certainly low enough to permit easy manual flapping-winged flight. The moons could be simply “art” in the sky, but they might serve a practical purpose: since the asteroid orbits between 2.5 and 3.8 AU from the sun, it would be cold and the moons, fitted with fusion reactors, could serve as small artificial suns to light and warm the place. The asteroid rotates once about every 5 hours; this could be slowed to a 24 hour day if needed, although if it has multiple mini-suns orbiting it, the length of the day would be pretty weird no matter what.

 Posted by at 1:45 am
Feb 082022
 

So Showtime has decided to excrete a “documentary” series based on the idea that white people are terribly racist and awful and evil (at least, that’s the impression the trailer gives). It starts off with the following in great big letters:

WARNING: THIS TRAILER MAY TRIGGER WHITE PEOPLE

Uh-huh.

Now, I’m sure there are a few white people who will get their knickers in a knot over the nonsense in the trailer and start firing off angry messages. But as a long-time white person, my reaction to it was… “Uhhh, *this* again.” And then I put it out of my mind, because it’s not worth ulcerating over. However, there are some people who watched the trailer, got triggered… and ain’t white. Perhaps their points of view may be of interest.

If you go to YouTube and search for “everything’s gonna be all white,” a total of twelve videos are returned (as of as I’m typing this) as top results. One of those is the actual trailer; the other eleven are reaction videos. Of those eleven, nine seem to be black reactors, two seem to be white… and ten of them think the trailer is racist trash. The eleventh is a white guy speaking foreignese, so I don’t know what his point of view was… but he didn’t freak out jump up and stomp around like the “documentarians” seem to think white people are supposed to do when confronted with racist non-white folks.

After *decades* of race baiters shrieking incessantly, rather than being “triggered,” this seems to be the most likely response:

Now, to go back to my life and continue to not pay for Showtime.

 

 

 Posted by at 10:07 pm
Feb 042022
 

In my lifetime there have been several noteworthy epidemics, but two stand out for their political nature. The Commie Cough, of course, has been wreaking havoc for a few years now, and opening the door for totalitarianism and mass Karening the whole time. But a generation earlier, another epidemic gained vast political clout and resulted in almost the exact opposite response. Where COVID has led to lockdowns of entire populations, mass testing and legal repercussions for not just ill-behaved people with the disease but well intentioned people without it… AIDS resulted in the opposite. AIDS is a disease that is 100% fatal barring the use of complex and expensive drugs that do not cure the disease but merely hold it in check; stop the drugs and not only do you probably die, you return to being a carrier. The entire planet was shut down to ostensibly deal with a disease that  well over 90% of those who get it will survive. But AIDS? Go ahead and do what you like, because reasons.

Had the same policies now in place for the Pinko Pox been in place for AIDS thirty years ago – in particular, mass testing and quarantining of the infected – the disease would be a historical footnote, popping up about as often as Ebola. But no, any suggestion for doing such a thing is seen as homophobic, despite the fact that the bulk of the lives spared would have been that very demographic.

But behold, joyous news:

More aggressive HIV strain that leads to AIDS twice as fast discovered in Netherlands

By allowing the HIV to persist, rather than wiping it out decades ago, it had the opportunity to mutate into an exciting strain that not only transforms the infection into full AIDS faster, it also results in a higher viral load and is much more transmissible. This strain has been around for a while but is seemingly becoming much more prevalent. Coming soon: an airborne strain as transmissible as COVID.

Some will argue against the need for testing and quarantining because AIDS “cocktails” have been around for a couple decades now that allow people with the virus to live seemingly healthy lives, apparently for a normal lifespan. And for those that have the virus, this doubtless is a good thing. But this is only a good thing for as long as the drugs last. A global war? A major economic meltdown? A Carrington Event? Complex, expensive drugs could easily become quite rare. How long does someone need to be off their antiretroviral meds before the HIV decides to become resistant to the meds?

 Posted by at 7:56 pm