CSpaceX wants Flight 15 to catch both the booster and the ship.
MCatching the booster was already insane. Now the whole thing comes back?
CJoe Rosa on X says Musk puts first-try ship catch odds at "at least 50 or 60 percent."
MIf that quote's real, 50 or 60 percent feels generous for something they've never done.
CThey'd never caught a booster either, until they did. Now it's close to routine.
MA booster comes back from a few miles up. The ship comes from orbit, survives reentry, then hovers by a tower.
CIt has survived reentry and landed in the ocean. The only remaining problem is precision.
MPrecision with an experimental vehicle that still needs a launch license. There's a reason the FAA hasn't signed off.
C"Only the FAA is left" means the hardware's waiting on paperwork. That's backwards.
MIt is not just paperwork, Chris. It's a skyscraper falling out of the sky.
CRegulators have reviewed every flight. At some point you have to fly it to find out what breaks.
MAnd if it breaks near the tower? You catch a rocket, not a demolition ball.
CThe tower already caught a booster. It didn't flinch.
MThat booster wasn't coming in from space with a belly full of reentry heat.
CThey solved the hard part of reentry. The catch is just the final hundred meters.
MThen why does Musk only give it 50 or 60 percent?
CPresumably because he knows the ship can wave off and splash if the approach isn't perfect.
MA wave-off at the last second is not as easy as it sounds.
CThat's why it's a coin flip plus ten. I'll take those odds.
MIf they catch the ship first try, Starship stops being an expensive experiment.
CIt becomes the truck that flies. That's the whole point of the design.
MI'll hold you to "truck that flies" when it belly flops into the Gulf.
CIf it does, the ocean is right there. We'll still get data.
MFine. We'll know soon enough.
MDifferent violent birth: Black Hole on X posted a Hubble image of a newborn star firing a superheated jet.
CA baby picture with a laser. Why should I care?
MThat jet slams into the surrounding cloud and helps decide whether planets form. That's our origin story.
CSo a toddler tantrum that shapes solar systems. Fine, it's cool.
MNASA confirmed it: Herbig-Haro objects HH 1 and HH 2 in Orion.
CYou just like saying "Herbig-Haro."
MI like a star that announces itself with a jet instead of a press release.
CDifferent fight: Tokenwire on X says schools that refuse Google's AI features are losing access to Search.
MThat would be punishment. Basic search shouldn't require signing up for AI.
CBut Google says the product has changed. You can't keep the old search forever.
MKids use search for homework. A school district says no to AI, so they lose the library?
CIt's not a library. It's a company, and companies retire products.
MSearch is infrastructure at this point. You don't get to yank it over an upsell.
CThat's my point. If it's infrastructure, it shouldn't depend on one company's AI rollout.
MI agree with that point, but the claim is unverified— no official word from Google yet.
CIf true, school boards will go to war over this.
MThe school board wars already started. This just gives everyone a better reason.
CGoogle is tying search to AI, and districts have no clean way to opt out.
MThey need an opt-out that doesn't break the basic product. That's product design.
CBut Google decides what it sells. The real question is whether schools have alternatives.
MThey don't. And that's exactly why this fight matters.