Podcasts about sls

China ha probado con éxito la cápsula Mengzhou, diseñada para llevar personas a la Luna. El ensayo probó su sistema de escape en caso de emergencia  Por Félix Riaño @LocutorCo  El martes 17 de junio, China lanzó con éxito una prueba de emergencia de su cápsula Mengzhou, sin tripulación, en el Centro de Lanzamiento de Jiuquan. Esta cápsula será usada en futuras misiones tripuladas a la Luna. La maniobra consistió en simular un accidente desde la plataforma de lanzamiento, para verificar que la cápsula pueda escapar si ocurre una explosión en tierra. En 20 segundos, el sistema de propulsión la elevó, luego soltó el módulo principal y lo dejó caer suavemente con paracaídas y airbags. ¿Por qué este ensayo podría significar que China le gane a Estados Unidos en la carrera lunar?  La cápsula Mengzhou, cuyo nombre significa “barco del sueño”, está diseñada para llevar astronautas chinos a la órbita lunar antes del año 2030. La prueba realizada el 17 de junio a las 12:30 del mediodía (hora de China) consistió en una simulación real de emergencia. Sin usar un cohete, se activaron motores sólidos que empujaron la cápsula hacia arriba. A los 20 segundos, se separó de su torre de escape y descendió con tres paracaídas hasta aterrizar con ayuda de un sistema de bolsas de aire. A las 12:32 ya estaba de vuelta en el suelo. Esta fue apenas la segunda vez que China realiza una prueba de escape desde cero metros de altitud. La anterior había sido en 1998, con la cápsula Shenzhou. Pero Mengzhou es diferente: su sistema de seguridad no depende del cohete, sino que está integrado en la cápsula misma. Esto permite responder con rapidez en caso de una falla grave durante el lanzamiento. Este paso era vital para validar el diseño y seguir con las próximas pruebas, que incluirán un ensayo en pleno vuelo, a mayor altitud y presión atmosférica. Aunque China aún está por detrás de la NASA en misiones lunares, esta cápsula nueva parece estar ganando terreno.Estados Unidos recortó el presupuesto para sus misiones lunares. La NASA enfrenta incertidumbre. El presupuesto propuesto por la Casa Blanca para 2026 elimina el cohete SLS y la cápsula Orion después de la misión Artemis 3, prevista para 2027. Mientras tanto, China avanza en el desarrollo de Mengzhou, el cohete Long March 10 y un módulo lunar, que podrían permitirle llegar primero a la Luna en esta nueva era. Mengzhou puede llevar hasta siete astronautas en misiones en órbita baja, o tres hasta la órbita lunar. Es parcialmente reutilizable, y ya fue probada en 2020 con un vuelo suborbital. Su versión lunar pesará unas 26 toneladas. Este sistema ha sido diseñado para cumplir con estándares internacionales y funcionar tanto con estaciones espaciales como en misiones lunares. El cohete Long March 10 tendrá tres etapas de 5 metros de diámetro, con motores de queroseno y oxígeno líquido. Está en construcción en Wenchang, en la isla de Hainan. Las plataformas de lanzamiento ya están siendo instaladas. El sistema completo de la misión lunar incluirá un aterrizador llamado Lanyue y, posiblemente, una combinación con el Long March 5B para pruebas atmosféricas. Según la Oficina de Ingeniería Espacial Tripulada de China (CMSEO), todos estos elementos están siendo desarrollados en paralelo. El objetivo es claro: tener una misión tripulada lista antes del año 2030. China ya probó el diseño de reingreso de Mengzhou a gran velocidad hace cinco años, y ahora se enfoca en demostrar que puede proteger vidas humanas desde el despegue hasta el regreso. China dio un paso firme hacia la Luna con la prueba de emergencia de Mengzhou. ¿Quién ganará esta nueva carrera lunar? Comenta y escucha más en el pódcast Flash Diario.

My fellow pro-growth/progress/abundance Up Wingers,America is embarking upon a New Space Age, with companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin ready to partner with NASA to take Americans to a new frontier — possibly as far as Mars. Lately, however, the world is witnessing uncertainty surrounding NASA leadership and even an odd feud between SpaceX boss Elon Musk and the White House. At a critical time for US space competition, let's hope key players can stick the landing.Today on Faster, Please! — The Podcast, I chat with James Meigs about the SLS rocket, NASA reforms, and the evolving private sector landscape.Meigs is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. He is a contributing editor of City Journal and writer of the Tech Commentary column at Commentary magazine. He is also the former editor of Popular Mechanics.Meigs is the author of a recent report from the Manhattan Institute, U.S. Space Policy: The Next Frontier.In This Episode* So long, Jared Isaacman (1:29)* Public sector priorities (5:36)* Supporting the space ecosystem (11:52)* A new role for NASA (17:27)* American space leadership (21:17)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversation. So long, Jared Isaacman (1:29)The withdrawal of Jared Isaacman . . . has really been met with total dismay in the space community. Everyone felt like he was the right kind of change agent for the agency that desperately needs reform, but not destruction.Pethokoukis: We're going to talk a lot about your great space policy report, which you wrote before the withdrawal of President Trump's NASA nominee, Jared Isaacman.What do you think of that? Does that change your conclusions? Good move, bad move? Just sort of your general thoughts apart from the surprising nature of it.Meigs: I worked sort of on and off for about a year on this report for the Manhattan Institute about recommendations for space policy, and it just came out a couple of months ago and already it's a different world. So much has happened. The withdrawal of Jared Isaacman — or the yanking of his nomination — has really been met with total dismay in the space community. Everyone felt like he was the right kind of change agent for the agency that desperately needs reform, but not destruction.Now, it remains to be seen what happens in terms of his replacement, but it certainly pulled the rug out from under the idea that NASA could be reformed and yet stay on track for some ambitious goals. I'm trying to be cautiously optimistic that some of these things will happen, but my sense is that the White House is not particularly interested in space.Interestingly, Musk wasn't really that involved in his role of DOGE and stuff. He didn't spend that much time on NASA. He wasn't micromanaging NASA policy, and I don't think Isaacman would've been just a mouthpiece for Musk either. He showed a sense of independence. So it remains to be seen, but my recommendations . . . and I share this with a lot of people advocating reform, is that NASA more or less needs to get out of the rocket-building business, and the Space Launch System, this big overpriced rocket they've been working on for years — we may need to fly it two more times to get us back to the moon, but after that, that thing should be retired. If there's a way to retire it sooner, that would be great. At more than $4 billion a launch, it's simply not affordable, and NASA will not be an agency that can routinely send people into space if we're relying on that white elephant.To me what was exciting about Isaacman was his genuine enthusiasm about space. It seemed like he understood that NASA needed reform and changes to the budget, but that the result would be an agency that still does big things. Is there a fear that his replacement won't be interested in NASA creative destruction, just destruction?We don't know for sure, but the budget that's been proposed is pretty draconian, cutting NASA's funding by about a quarter and recommending particularly heavy cuts in the science missions, which would require cutting short some existing missions that are underway and not moving ahead with other planned missions.There is room for saving in some of these things. I advocate a more nimble approach to NASA's big science missions. Instead of sending one $4 billion rover to Mars every 20 years, once launch costs come down, how about we send ten little ones and if a couple of them don't make it, we could still be getting much more science done for the same price or less. So that's the kind of thing Isaacman was talking about, and that's the kind of thing that will be made possible as launch costs continue to fall, as you've written about, Jim. So it requires a new way of thinking at NASA. It requires a more entrepreneurial spirit and it remains to be seen whether another administrator can bring that along the way. We were hoping that Isaacman would.Public sector priorities (5:36)Congress has never deviated from focusing more on keeping these projects alive than on whether these projects achieve their goals.It seems to me that there are only two reasons, at this point, to be in favor of the SLS rocket. One: There's a political pork jobs aspect. And the other is that it's important to beat China to the moon, which the Artemis program is meant to do. Does that seem accurate?Pretty much, yeah. You can be for beating China the moon and still be against the SLS rocket, you kind of just grit your teeth and say, okay, we've got to fly it two more times because it would be hard to cobble together, in the timeframe available, a different approach — but not impossible. There are other heavy lift rockets. Once you can refuel in orbit and do other things, there's a lot of ways to get a heavy payload into orbit. When I started my report, it looked like SLS was the only game in town, but that's really not the case. There are other options.The Starship has to quit blowing up.I would've loved to have seen the last couple of Starship missions be a little more successful. That's unfortunate. The pork part of SLS just can't be underestimated. From the get go, going way back to when the Space Shuttle was retired in 2011, and even before to when after the Columbia Space Shuttle disaster — that's the second disaster — there was a really big effort to figure out how to replace the space shuttle, what would come next. There was a strong movement in Congress at that time to say, “Well, whatever you build, whatever you do, all the factories that are involved in working on the Space Shuttle, all of the huge workforces in NASA that work on the space shuttle, all of this manpower has to be retained.” And Congress talked a lot about keeping the experience, the expertise, the talent going.I can see some legitimacy to that argument, but if you looked at the world that way, then you would always focus on keeping the jobs of the past viable instead of the jobs of the future: What are we going to do with the blacksmiths who shoe horses? If we lose all this technological capability of shoeing horses . . . we'd better not bring in all these cars! That's an exaggeration, but as a result, first they aim to replace the Space Shuttle with a rocket called Constellation that would recycle some of the Shuttle components. And then eventually they realized that that was just too bloated, too expensive. That got canceled during the Obama administration replaced with the Space Launch System, which is supposed to be cheaper, more efficient, able to be built in a reasonable amount of time.It wound up being just as bloated and also technologically backward. They're still keeping technology from the Shuttle era. The solid fuel engines, which, as we recall from the first Shuttle disaster, were problematic, and the Shuttle main engine design as well. So when SLS flies with humans on board for the first time, supposedly next year, it'll be using technology that was designed before any of the astronauts were even born.In this day and age, that's kind of mind-blowing, and it will retain these enormous workforces in these plants that happen to be located in states with powerful lawmakers. So there's an incredible incentive to just keep it all going, not to let things change, not to let anything be retired, and to keep that money flowing to contractors, to workers and to individual states. Congress has never deviated from focusing more on keeping these projects alive than on whether these projects achieve their goals.I've seen a video of congressional hearings from 15 years ago, and the hostility toward the idea of there being a private-sector alternative to NASA, now it seems almost inexplicable seeing that even some of these people were Republicans from Texas.Seeing where we are now, it's just amazing because now that we have the private sector, we're seeing innovation, we're seeing the drop in launch costs, the reusability — just a completely different world than what existed 15, 16, 17 years ago.I don't think people really realize how revolutionary NASA's commercial programs were. They really sort of snuck them in quietly at first, starting as far back as 2005, a small program to help companies develop their own space transportation systems that could deliver cargo to the International Space Station.SpaceX was initially not necessarily considered a leader in that. It was a little startup company nobody took very seriously, but they wound up doing the best job. Then later they also led the race to be the first to deliver astronauts to the International Space Station, saved NASA billions of dollars, and helped launch this private-industry revolution in space that we're seeing today that's really exciting.It's easy to say, “Oh, NASA's just this old sclerotic bureaucracy,” and there's some truth to that, but NASA has always had a lot of innovative people, and a lot of the pressure of the push to move to this commercial approach where NASA essentially charters a rocket the way you would charter a fishing boat rather than trying to build and own its own equipment. That's the key distinction. You've got to give them credit for that and you also have to give SpaceX enormous credit for endless technological innovation that has brought down these prices.So I totally agree, it's inconceivable to think of trying to run NASA today without their commercial partners. Of course, we'd like to see more than just SpaceX in there. That's been a surprise to people. In a weird way, SpaceX's success is a problem because you want an ecosystem of competitors that NASA can choose from, not just one dominant supplier.Supporting the space ecosystem (11:52)There's a reason that the private space industry is booming in the US much more than elsewhere in the world. But I think they could do better and I'd like to see reform there.Other than the technical difficulty of the task, is there something government could be doing or not doing, perhaps on the regulatory side, to encourage a more sort of a bigger, more vibrant space ecosystem.In my Manhattan Institute report, I recommend some changes, particularly, the FAA needs to continue reforming its launch regulations. They're more restrictive and take longer than they should. I think they're making some progress. They recently authorized more launches of the experimental SpaceX Starship, but it shouldn't take months to go through the paperwork to authorize the launch of a new spacecraft.I think the US, we're currently better than most countries in terms of allowing private space. There's a reason that the private space industry is booming in the US much more than elsewhere in the world. But I think they could do better and I'd like to see reform there.I also think NASA needs to continue its efforts to work with a wide range of vendors in this commercial paradigm and accept that a lot of them might not pan out. We've seen a really neat NASA program to help a lot of different companies, but a lot of startups have been involved in trying to build and land small rovers on the moon. Well, a lot of them have crashed.Not an easy task apparently.No. When I used to be editor of Popular Mechanics magazine, one of the great things I got to do was hang out with Buzz Aldrin, and Buzz Aldrin talking about landing on the moon — now, looking back, you realize just how insanely risky that was. You see all these rovers designed today with all the modern technology failing to land a much smaller, lighter object safely on the moon, and you just think, “Wow, that was an incredible accomplishment.” And you have so much admiration for the guts of the guys who did it.As they always say, space is hard, and I think NASA working with commercial vendors to help them, give them some seed money, help them get started, pay them a set fee for the mission that you're asking for, but also build into your planning — just the way an entrepreneur would — that some product launches aren't going to work, some ideas are going to fail, sometimes you're going to have to start over. That's just part of the process, and if you're not spending ridiculous amounts of money, that's okay.When we talk about vendors, who are we talking about? When we talk about this ecosystem as it currently exists, what do these companies do besides SpaceX?The big one that everybody always mentions first, of course, is Blue Origin, Jeff Bezos's startup that's been around as long as SpaceX, but just moved much more slowly. Partly because when it first started up, it was almost as much of a think tank to explore different ideas about space and less of a scrappy startup trying to just make money by launching satellites for paying customers as soon as possible. That was Musk's model. But they've finally launched. They've launched a bunch of suborbital flights, you've seen where they carry various celebrities and stuff up to the edge of space for a few minutes and they come right back down. That's been a chance for them to test out their engines, which have seemed solid and reliable, but they've finally done one mission with their New Glenn rocket. Like SpaceX, it's a reusable rocket which can launch pretty heavy payloads. Once that gets proven and they've had a few more launches under their belt, should be an important part of this ecosystem.But you've got other companies, you've got Stoke Aerospace, you've got Firefly . . . You've got a few companies that are in the launch business, so they want to compete with SpaceX to launch mostly satellites for paying customers, also cargo for payloads for governments. And then you have a lot of other companies that are doing various kinds of space services and they're not necessarily going to try to be in the launch business per se. We don't need 40 different companies doing launches with different engines, different designs, different fuels, and stuff like that. Eight or 10 might be great, six might be great. We'll see how the market sorts out.But then if you look at the development of the auto industry, it started with probably hundreds of little small shops, hand-building cars, but by the mid-century it had settled down to a few big companies through consolidation. And instead of hundreds of engine designs that were given 1950, there were probably in the US, I don't know, 12 engine designs or something like that. Stuff got standardized — we'll see the same thing happen in space — but you also saw an enormous ecosystem of companies building batteries, tires, transmissions, parts, wipers, all sorts of little things and servicing in an industry to service the automobile. Now, rockets are a lot more centralized and high-tech, but you're going to see something like that in the space economy, and it's already happening.A new role for NASA (17:27)I think NASA should get more ambitious in deep-space flight, both crewed and uncrewed.What do you see NASA should be doing? We don't want them designing rockets anymore, so what should they do? What does that portfolio look like?That's an excellent question. I think that we are in this pivotal time when, because of the success of SpaceX, and hopefully soon other vendors, they can relieve themselves of that responsibility to build their own rockets. That gets out of a lot of the problems of Congress meddling to maximize pork flowing to their states and all of that kind of stuff. So that's a positive in itself.Perhaps a bug rather than a feature for Congress.Right, but it also means that technology will move much, much faster as private companies are innovating and competing with each other. That gives NASA an opportunity. What should they do with it? I think NASA should get more ambitious in deep-space flight, both crewed and uncrewed. Because it'll get much cheaper to get cargo into orbit to get payload up there, as I said, they can launch more science missions, and then when it comes to human missions, I like the overall plan of Artemis. The details were really pulled together during the first Trump administration, which had a really good space policy overall, which is to return to the moon, set up a permanent or long-term habitation on the moon. The way NASA sketches it out, not all the burden is carried by NASA.They envision — or did envision — a kind of ecosystem on the moon where you might have private vendors there providing services. You might have a company that mines ice and makes oxygen, and fuel, and water for the residents of these space stations. You might have somebody else building habitation that could be used by visiting scientists who are not NASA astronauts, but also used by NASA.There's all this possibility to combine what NASA does with the private sector, and what NASA should always do is be focused on the stuff the private sector can't yet do. That would be the deep-space probes. That would be sending astronauts on the most daring non-routine missions. As the private sector develops the ability to do some of those things, then NASA can move on to the next thing. That's one set of goals.Another set of goals is to do the research into technologies, things that are hard for the private sector to undertake. In particular, things like new propulsion for deep-space travel. There's a couple of different designs for nuclear rocket engines that I think are really promising, super efficient. Sadly, under the current budget cuts that are proposed at NASA, that's one of the programs that's being cut, and if you really want to do deep space travel routinely, ultimately, chemical fuels, they're not impossible, but they're not as feasible because you've got to get all that heavy — whatever your fuel is, methane or whatever it is — up into either into orbit or you've got to manufacture it on the moon or somewhere. The energy density of plutonium or uranium is just so much higher and it just allows you to do so much more with lighter weight. So I'd like to see them research those kinds of things that no individual private company could really afford to do at this point, and then when the technology is more mature, hand it off to the private sector.American space leadership (21:17)Exploration's never been totally safe, and if people want to take risks on behalf of a spirit of adventure and on behalf of humanity at large, I say we let them.If things go well —reforms, funding, lower launch costs — what does America's role in space look like in 10 to 15 years, and what's your concern if things go a darker route, like cutting nuclear engine research you were just talking about?I'll sketch out the bright scenario. This is very up your alley, Jim.Yeah, I viewed this as a good thing, so you tell me what it is.In 15 years I would love to see a small permanent colony at the south pole of the moon where you can harvest ice from the craters and maybe you'd have some habitation there, maybe even a little bit of space tourism starting up. People turn up their nose at space tourism, but it's a great way to help fund really important research. Remember the Golden Age of Exploration, James Cook and Darwin, those expeditions were self-funded. They were funded by rich people. If rich people want to go to space, I say I'm all for it.So a little base on the moon, important research going on, we're learning how to have people live on a foreign body, NASA is gathering tons of information and training for the next goal, which I think is even more important: I do agree we should get people to Mars. I don't think we should bypass the moon to get to Mars, I don't think that's feasible, that's what Elon Musk keeps suggesting. I think it's too soon for that. We want to learn about how people handle living off-planet for a long period of time closer to home — and how to mine ice and how to do all these things — closer to home, three or four days away, not months and months away. If something goes wrong, they'll be a lot more accessible.But I'd like to see, by then, some Mars missions and maybe an attempt to start the first long-term habitation of Mars. I don't think we're going to see that in 10 years, but I think that's a great goal, and I don't think it's a goal that taxpayers should be expected to fund 100 percent. I think by then we should see even more partnerships where the private companies that really want to do this — and I'm looking at Elon Musk because he's been talking about it for 20 years — they should shoulder a lot of the costs of that. If they see a benefit in that, they should also bear some of the costs. So that's the bright scenario.Along with that, all kinds of stuff going on in low-earth orbit: manufacturing drugs, seeing if you can harness solar energy, private space stations, better communications, and a robust science program exploring deep space with unmanned spacecraft. I'd like to see all of that. I think that could be done for a reasonable amount of money with the proper planning.The darker scenario is that we've just had too much chaos and indecision in NASA for years. We think of NASA as being this agency of great exploration, but they've done very little for 20 years . . . I take that back — NASA's uncrewed space program has had a lot of successes. It's done some great stuff. But when it comes to manned space flight, it's pretty much just been the International Space Station, and I think we've gotten most of the benefit out of that. They're planning to retire that in 2030. So then what happens? After we retired the Space Shuttle, space practically went into a very low-growth period. We haven't had a human being outside of low-earth orbit since Apollo, and that's embarrassing, frankly. We should be much more ambitious.I'm afraid we're entering a period where, without strong leadership and without a strong focus on really grand goals, then Congress will reassert its desire to use NASA as a piggy bank for their states and districts and aerospace manufacturers will build the stuff they're asked to build, but nothing will move very quickly. That's the worst-case scenario. We'll see, but right now, with all of the kind of disorder in Washington, I think we are in a period where we should be concerned.Can America still call itself the world's space leader if its role is mainly launching things into Earth orbit, with private companies running space stations for activities like drug testing or movie production if, meanwhile, China is building space stations and establishing a presence on the Moon? In that scenario, doesn't it seem like China is the world's leader in space?That's a real issue. China has a coherent nationalistic plan for space, and they are pursuing it, they're pouring a lot of resources into it, and they're making a lot of headway. As always, when China rolls out its new, cutting-edge technology, it usually looks a lot like something originally built in the US, and they're certainly following SpaceX's model as closely as they can in terms of reusable rockets right now.China wants to get to the moon. They see this as a space race the way the Soviets saw a space race. It's a battle for national prestige. One thing that worries me, is under the Artemis plan during the first Trump administration, there was also something called the Artemis Accords — it still exists — which is an international agreement among countries to A) join in where they can if they want, with various American initiatives. So we've got partners that we're planning to build different parts of the Artemis program, including a space station around the moon called Gateway, which actually isn't the greatest idea, but the European Space Agency and others were involved in helping build it.But also, all these countries, more than 50 countries have signed on to these aspirational goals of the Artemis Accords, which are: freedom of navigation, shared use of space, going for purposes of peaceful exploration, being transparent about what you're doing in space so that other countries can see it, avoiding generating more space junk, space debris, which is a huge problem with all the stuff we've got up there now, including a lot of old decrepit satellites and rocket bodies. So committing to not just leaving your upper-stage rocket bodies drifting around in space. A lot of different good goals, and the fact that all these countries wanted to join in on this shows America's preeminence. But if we back away, or become chaotic, or start disrespecting those allies who've signed on, they're going to look for another partner in space and China is going to roll out the red carpet for them.You get a phone call from SpaceX. They've made some great leap forwards. That Starship, it's ready to go to Mars. They're going to create a human habitation out there. They need a journalist. By the way, it's a one-way trip. Do you go?I don't go to Mars. I've got family here. That comes first for me. But I know some people want to do that, and I think that we should celebrate that. The space journalist Rand Simberg wrote a book years ago called Safe Is Not An Option — that we should not be too hung up on trying to make space exploration totally safe. Exploration's never been totally safe, and if people want to take risks on behalf of a spirit of adventure and on behalf of humanity at large, I say we let them. So maybe that first trip to Mars is a one-way trip, or at least a one-way for a couple of years until more flights become feasible and more back-and-forth return flights become something that can be done routinely. It doesn't really appeal to me, but it'll appeal to somebody, and I'm glad we have those kinds of people in our society.On sale everywhere The Conservative Futurist: How To Create the Sci-Fi World We Were PromisedMicro Reads▶ Economics* Trump economy shows surprising resilience despite tariff impacts - Wapo* Supply Chains Become New Battleground in the Global Trade War - WSJ* This A.I. Company Wants to Take Your Job - NYT* The Mirage of Geoeconomics - PS* Japan urged to use gloomier population forecasts after plunge in births - FT* Europe's nuclear fusion potential draws record investment round - FT▶ Business* How Disney's AI lawsuit could shift the future of entertainment - Wapo* Meta plans big bet on AI's secret ingredient: human brains - FT* Nvidia and Perplexity Team Up in European AI Push - WSJ* CRMArena-Pro: Holistic Assessment of LLM Agents Across Diverse Business Scenarios and Interactions - Arxiv* Fervo Snags $206 Million for Cape Station Geothermal - Heatmap* BYD launches cut-price EVs in Europe amid global price war - Semafor▶ Policy/Politics* The right refuses to take AI seriously - Vox* The Gig Economy Benefits Freelance Workers—Until Regulation Steps In - AEI* The war is on for Congress' AI law ban - The Verge* Disney and Universal Sue AI Company Midjourney for Copyright Infringement - Wired* Big Tech Is Finally Losing - NYT Opinion* American Science's Culture Has Contributed to the Grave Threat It Now Faces - Real Clear Science▶ AI/Digital* New Apple study challenges whether AI models truly “reason” through problems - Ars* The problem of AI chatbots telling people what they want to hear - FT* With the launch of o3-pro, let's talk about what AI “reasoning” actually does - Ars* ‘This is coming for everyone': A new kind of AI bot takes over the web - Wapo* Europe's AI computing shortage ‘will be resolved' soon, says Nvidia chief - FT* We're Not Ready for the AI Power Surge - Free Press▶ Biotech/Health* Pancreatic cancer vaccine eradicates trace of disease in early trials - New Atlas* World first: brain implant lets man speak with expression — and sing - Nature* The Alzheimer's drug pipeline is healthier than you might think - The Economist▶ Clean Energy/Climate* Big Tech Cares About Clean Energy Tax Credits — But Maybe Not Enough - Heatmap* Nvidia ‘Climate in a Bottle' Opens a View Into Earth's Future. What Will We Do With It? - WSJ* Oil's Lost Decade Is About to Be Repeated - Bberg Opinion* How the Pentagon Secretly Sparked America's Clean Energy Boom - The Debrief▶ Space/Transportation* Musk-Trump feud is a wake-up call on space - FT* Trump's 2026 budget cuts would force the world's most powerful solar telescope to close - Space▶ Up Wing/Down Wing* ‘Invasive Species'? Japan's Growing Pains on Immigration - Bberg Opinion* Incredible Testimonies - Aeon* How and When Was the Wheel Invented? - Real Clear Science▶ Substacks/Newsletters* Trump's "beautiful" bill wrecks our energy future - Slow Boring* DOGE Looked Broken Before the Trump-Musk Breakup - The Dispatch* Steve Teles on abundance: prehistory, present, and future - The Permanent Problem* Is Macroeconomics a Mature Science? - Conversable EconomistFaster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

Gustavo Ribeiro discusses growing up in a small town in Portugal, his dad opening a skate shop, Shane O'neill being a big inspiration, staying at Micky Papa's house with Yuto, winning Tampa Am, his SLS strategy, leaving Jart & getting on Thank You Skateboards, skating for Red Bull, his dream trick, his thoughts on the format of the Olympics and much more! Timestamps 00:00:00 Gustavo Ribeiro 00:04:30 Chris almost dropped his SLS trophy 00:06:46 When he normally skates he doesn't try the hard tricks he usually does in contest 00:08:11 Shane O'neill was an inspiration 00:09:03 Visualizing his tricks & Blacking out while doing a trick 00:11:57 SLS Miami- Nyjah & Gustavo battle for first place 00:15:25 SLS strategy 00:21:21 His brother Gabriel 00:23:36 SLS Super Crown - its all mental 00:34:55 Having a private park to train for the Olympics 00:40:04 His dad had opened a skate shop 00:44:10 Dad turned him and his brother pro at 8 years old - Goo Goo and Ga Ga 00:47:36 Skating for Jart - brother got on Element Portugal 00:50:14 Winning Tampa Am 00:57:34 Staying at Micky Papa's house with Yuto 01:00:44 Skating for Red Bull 01:06:41 Leaving Jart & getting on Thank You Skateboards 01:14:41 Superstitious? - no music in his headphones 01:17:51 Thank You video in the works 01:25:12 Clipper 01:30:49 Dream trick 01:32:09 His thoughts on the format of the Olympics Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

NASA perdería 41 misiones científicas si se aprueba el presupuesto de Trump  La propuesta de Trump reduciría el presupuesto de la NASA un 25 %, eliminando misiones a Marte, Venus, la Tierra y el espacio profundo.     Por Félix Riaño @LocutorCo  La NASA está a punto de enfrentar el mayor recorte de presupuesto en su historia si se aprueba la propuesta del expresidente Donald Trump para el año fiscal 2026. La medida implicaría una reducción de 24.800 a 18.800 millones de dólares, lo que representa un recorte del 25 %. Eso dejaría a la agencia en su nivel más bajo de financiación desde hace décadas, ya ajustado a inflación. Se cancelarían más de 40 misiones científicas, incluyendo observatorios de asteroides, sondas a Marte y programas de monitoreo climático desde el espacio. ¿Estamos viendo el fin de una era en la exploración espacial estadounidense?  Trump también amenaza con romper contratos con SpaceX.  El 30 de mayo, la NASA recibió la versión detallada del presupuesto 2026 propuesto por Trump. Desde principios de mayo ya se conocía que se avecinaban tiempos difíciles. La propuesta apunta a recortar casi a la mitad el presupuesto para ciencias espaciales. Misiones emblemáticas como Mars Sample Return, MAVEN, DAVINCI y VERITAS quedarían sin financiación. Incluso los observatorios Voyager, que llevan más de 45 años enviando datos desde los bordes del sistema solar, perderían su presupuesto y quedarían flotando sin dirección. Esta no es solo una decisión económica: es una redefinición del propósito de la agencia, centrado exclusivamente en una carrera por llegar antes a Marte que China.  Los recortes afectarían colaboraciones internacionales clave. La misión ExoMars, liderada por la Agencia Espacial Europea y apoyada por la NASA, quedaría huérfana de apoyo estadounidense. También se eliminaría el respaldo a la estación lunar Gateway, poniendo en riesgo la participación europea en futuros viajes a la Luna. Las misiones de observación de la Tierra, fundamentales para monitorear el cambio climático, sufrirían una reducción del 53 %. Incluso se eliminarían misiones ya operativas, como el orbitador MAVEN o el observatorio de rayos X Chandra. El daño va más allá de la ciencia: se perderían miles de empleos entre personal civil y contratistas. Y lo más preocupante: una vez apagados, muchos de estos proyectos no podrán reiniciarse.  Algunos senadores republicanos ya están actuando para evitar estos recortes. Desde el comité de Comercio, Espacio y Transporte, liderado por Ted Cruz, se propone devolver miles de millones al presupuesto de la NASA, principalmente para proteger el programa Artemis. Esta defensa, sin embargo, prioriza los vuelos tripulados a la Luna, no las misiones científicas. Se busca prolongar la vida útil del cohete SLS, aunque la Casa Blanca prefiere reemplazarlo con vehículos más baratos como el Starship de SpaceX o el New Glenn de Blue Origin. Pero los desarrollos de esas empresas aún enfrentan fallos técnicos. La tensión entre Trump y Elon Musk también complica el panorama, con amenazas de romper contratos federales con SpaceX.  Las misiones que podrían cancelarse incluyen VERITAS y DAVINCI, ambas destinadas a estudiar Venus con gran detalle. OSIRIS-APEX, continuación del exitoso OSIRIS-REx, perdería la oportunidad de estudiar el asteroide Apophis en 2029, cuando pase a solo 32.000 kilómetros de la Tierra. También se recortarían fondos a LISA, un proyecto conjunto con Europa para detectar ondas gravitacionales en el espacio. Y el telescopio Chandra, lanzado en 1999, dejaría de recibir mantenimiento pese a seguir enviando datos valiosos. El presupuesto propuesto justifica estos recortes con el argumento de que los 7 mil millones anuales que NASA destina a ciencia son “insostenibles”. Pero la comunidad científica advierte que se trata de un golpe sin precedentes a décadas de avances y cooperación internacional.  Si se aprueba el presupuesto, la NASA dejaría de ser una agencia científica y pasaría a ser solo una agencia de vuelos tripulados. ¿Es ese el camino que queremos para la exploración espacial? Puedes escuchar más en el pódcast Flash Diario en Spotify. Bibliografía The Economist - 4 de junio de 2025Wall Street Journal - 5 de junio de 2025BBC News - 6 de junio de 2025Washington Post - 8 de junio de 2025Conviértete en un seguidor de este podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/flash-diario-de-el-siglo-21-es-hoy--5835407/support.

John and I welcomed Casey Dreier from The Planetary Society to the program to go over the proposed NASA space and science budget cuts and project eliminations. Casey suspected the direction for the cuts originated out of OMB without much space guidance or thought. He identified several of the projects and programs identified for either a budget cut such as the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope to the New Horizons and Venus missions being totally eliminated. Casey also talked about the bleak future for SLS and the Gateway for their demise post Artemis 3. Casey talked about their being a shift to commercial Moon missions but with little detail and clarity. Cislunar development, cargo and resupply to the ISS, the future for the private space stations, Mars and EDL for Mars plus demos all were part of our discussion. In Part 2, John talked about the robotic missions including existing missions plus the future missions, all of course depending on robots. Casey worked in commentary about cuts and changes for both JPL and Goddard, two very important and key Nasa centers. Before concluding the program, our guest was asked about the impact of the layoffs for NASA scientists and engineers. Casey suggested they would have an uncertain future ahead of them as their might not be abundant job opportunities for these important skills. Read the full summary at The Space Show website, www.thespaceshow.com and also at doctorspace.substack.com.

What a wild week it's been for NASA. With drastic budget cuts looming—pending any action by Congress—then comes the sudden and unexpected pulling of Jared Isaacman for the role of NASA Administrator, with no replacement named. Then came the very public split between President Trump and Elon Musk, and a flurry of furious Twitter/X and Truth Social postings, aimed at each other with razor-sharp edges. And finally, the proposed and drastic cuts to NASA outreach and education budgets, slimming them to nearly nothing. These are strange and concerning times for America's space agency, a premier global brand and icon of peaceful American prowess. We turned to Casey Dreier, the Chief of Space Policy for The Planetary Society, who has been quite vocal in his concern, for context. These are critical times for spaceflight, so you won't want to miss this episode!Headlines Trump and Musk "Bromance" Ends: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik discuss the public falling out between Donald Trump and Elon Musk, which included Trump's threats to cancel SpaceX contracts and Musk's counter-accusations regarding the Jeffrey Epstein files. Commercial Crew Program and Boeing's Starliner: Tariq Malik highlights the critical role of SpaceX's Dragon in NASA's commercial crew program, especially given Boeing's Starliner delays, making NASA dependent on SpaceX for U.S. independent access to space. Japanese ispace Lunar Lander Failure: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik discuss the second failed attempt by the Japanese company ispace to land its Hakuto-R lunar lander on the moon, losing the European Space Agency's mini-rover, called Tenacious, in the process. Speculation on SpaceX Nationalization: The hosts discuss online speculation, including from Steve Bannon, about the possibility of the U.S. government nationalizing SpaceX, and Elon Musk's subsequent de-escalation. LAUNCH Act: Rod Pyle introduces the bipartisan LAUNCH Act, aimed at streamlining licensing for commercial space companies to encourage more rocket launches with faster approvals. Senate Reconciliation Bill: Tariq Malik and Rod Pyle discuss Senator Ted Cruz's Senate reconciliation bill, which proposes to restore funding for the Space Launch System (SLS), increase NASA's budget by $10 billion, and fund Artemis 4 and 5, missions previously targeted for alternate architectures. 60th Anniversary of First U.S. Spacewalk: The hosts commemorate Ed White's historic spacewalk during the Gemini 4 mission in 1965 and discuss anecdotes and lingering questions surrounding the event. Definition of an Astronaut/Spacewalker Debate: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik briefly touch on the ongoing debate about what defines an "astronaut" or "spacewalker," given varying definitions and commercial spaceflight. Tribute to Marc Garneau: The hosts pay tribute to Marc Garneau, Canada's first astronaut, who passed away at 76, highlighting his career with the Canadian Space Agency and his later political career. The Dark Age of NASA Science The Planetary Society's Mission: Space policy expert Casey Dreier provides an overview of the Planetary Society, its founding by Carl Sagan, its independence from government and corporate funding, and its projects like the Lightsail 2. Catastrophic NASA Budget Proposal: Casey Dreier These show notes have been truncated due to length. For the full show notes, visit https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space/episodes/164 Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Guest: Casey Dreier

What a wild week it's been for NASA. With drastic budget cuts looming—pending any action by Congress—then comes the sudden and unexpected pulling of Jared Isaacman for the role of NASA Administrator, with no replacement named. Then came the very public split between President Trump and Elon Musk, and a flurry of furious Twitter/X and Truth Social postings, aimed at each other with razor-sharp edges. And finally, the proposed and drastic cuts to NASA outreach and education budgets, slimming them to nearly nothing. These are strange and concerning times for America's space agency, a premier global brand and icon of peaceful American prowess. We turned to Casey Dreier, the Chief of Space Policy for The Planetary Society, who has been quite vocal in his concern, for context. These are critical times for spaceflight, so you won't want to miss this episode!Headlines Trump and Musk "Bromance" Ends: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik discuss the public falling out between Donald Trump and Elon Musk, which included Trump's threats to cancel SpaceX contracts and Musk's counter-accusations regarding the Jeffrey Epstein files. Commercial Crew Program and Boeing's Starliner: Tariq Malik highlights the critical role of SpaceX's Dragon in NASA's commercial crew program, especially given Boeing's Starliner delays, making NASA dependent on SpaceX for U.S. independent access to space. Japanese ispace Lunar Lander Failure: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik discuss the second failed attempt by the Japanese company ispace to land its Hakuto-R lunar lander on the moon, losing the European Space Agency's mini-rover, called Tenacious, in the process. Speculation on SpaceX Nationalization: The hosts discuss online speculation, including from Steve Bannon, about the possibility of the U.S. government nationalizing SpaceX, and Elon Musk's subsequent de-escalation. LAUNCH Act: Rod Pyle introduces the bipartisan LAUNCH Act, aimed at streamlining licensing for commercial space companies to encourage more rocket launches with faster approvals. Senate Reconciliation Bill: Tariq Malik and Rod Pyle discuss Senator Ted Cruz's Senate reconciliation bill, which proposes to restore funding for the Space Launch System (SLS), increase NASA's budget by $10 billion, and fund Artemis 4 and 5, missions previously targeted for alternate architectures. 60th Anniversary of First U.S. Spacewalk: The hosts commemorate Ed White's historic spacewalk during the Gemini 4 mission in 1965 and discuss anecdotes and lingering questions surrounding the event. Definition of an Astronaut/Spacewalker Debate: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik briefly touch on the ongoing debate about what defines an "astronaut" or "spacewalker," given varying definitions and commercial spaceflight. Tribute to Marc Garneau: The hosts pay tribute to Marc Garneau, Canada's first astronaut, who passed away at 76, highlighting his career with the Canadian Space Agency and his later political career. The Dark Age of NASA Science The Planetary Society's Mission: Space policy expert Casey Dreier provides an overview of the Planetary Society, its founding by Carl Sagan, its independence from government and corporate funding, and its projects like the Lightsail 2. Catastrophic NASA Budget Proposal: Casey Dreier These show notes have been truncated due to length. For the full show notes, visit https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space/episodes/164 Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Guest: Casey Dreier

What a wild week it's been for NASA. With drastic budget cuts looming—pending any action by Congress—then comes the sudden and unexpected pulling of Jared Isaacman for the role of NASA Administrator, with no replacement named. Then came the very public split between President Trump and Elon Musk, and a flurry of furious Twitter/X and Truth Social postings, aimed at each other with razor-sharp edges. And finally, the proposed and drastic cuts to NASA outreach and education budgets, slimming them to nearly nothing. These are strange and concerning times for America's space agency, a premier global brand and icon of peaceful American prowess. We turned to Casey Dreier, the Chief of Space Policy for The Planetary Society, who has been quite vocal in his concern, for context. These are critical times for spaceflight, so you won't want to miss this episode!Headlines Trump and Musk "Bromance" Ends: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik discuss the public falling out between Donald Trump and Elon Musk, which included Trump's threats to cancel SpaceX contracts and Musk's counter-accusations regarding the Jeffrey Epstein files. Commercial Crew Program and Boeing's Starliner: Tariq Malik highlights the critical role of SpaceX's Dragon in NASA's commercial crew program, especially given Boeing's Starliner delays, making NASA dependent on SpaceX for U.S. independent access to space. Japanese ispace Lunar Lander Failure: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik discuss the second failed attempt by the Japanese company ispace to land its Hakuto-R lunar lander on the moon, losing the European Space Agency's mini-rover, called Tenacious, in the process. Speculation on SpaceX Nationalization: The hosts discuss online speculation, including from Steve Bannon, about the possibility of the U.S. government nationalizing SpaceX, and Elon Musk's subsequent de-escalation. LAUNCH Act: Rod Pyle introduces the bipartisan LAUNCH Act, aimed at streamlining licensing for commercial space companies to encourage more rocket launches with faster approvals. Senate Reconciliation Bill: Tariq Malik and Rod Pyle discuss Senator Ted Cruz's Senate reconciliation bill, which proposes to restore funding for the Space Launch System (SLS), increase NASA's budget by $10 billion, and fund Artemis 4 and 5, missions previously targeted for alternate architectures. 60th Anniversary of First U.S. Spacewalk: The hosts commemorate Ed White's historic spacewalk during the Gemini 4 mission in 1965 and discuss anecdotes and lingering questions surrounding the event. Definition of an Astronaut/Spacewalker Debate: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik briefly touch on the ongoing debate about what defines an "astronaut" or "spacewalker," given varying definitions and commercial spaceflight. Tribute to Marc Garneau: The hosts pay tribute to Marc Garneau, Canada's first astronaut, who passed away at 76, highlighting his career with the Canadian Space Agency and his later political career. The Dark Age of NASA Science The Planetary Society's Mission: Space policy expert Casey Dreier provides an overview of the Planetary Society, its founding by Carl Sagan, its independence from government and corporate funding, and its projects like the Lightsail 2. Catastrophic NASA Budget Proposal: Casey Dreier These show notes have been truncated due to length. For the full show notes, visit https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space/episodes/164 Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Guest: Casey Dreier

Episode 25: LifestyleLynx Lovefest RecapMay 2025‘Main Topic': A Recap of our Crazy, Insane Lovefest group trip to Temptation Resort in Cancun Mexico for our wedding. Plus, special guest attendees detailing their Sexual Explorations with a Newbie couple!‘What Have We Done Lately': Wild sexy time at a house party in Pennsylvania with some Girl-Girl Strap-on action! Onto recalling our Incredible Group Trip to Temptation Resort Cancun, Mexico that was beyond perfectly fabulous. If you missed it, we have something else planned, listen on! Our PA house party hosts came to visit us to record our Main Topic here in the studio. Followed by dinner, dancing and the usual mayhem. The next weekend we stopped in at a Meet & Greet in New Hope PA that was half our tribe and new people to explore. Lastly, friend's annual Memorial Day Lifestyle party is always a warm welcome to end the month.‘Where We Are Going Next': Well first up is our House party with 54 people already attending. Going to be FUN! Then onto the recurring Summer Solstice Orgy House Party that friends host. Don't miss the upcoming ‘Intimate Parties Group' events in Scranton PA June 6-7 & 20-21 and ‘ShareNation' events at Gunnison Beach NJ July 12 and then Sept 5-6 Detention/Pool Party/White Party in Parsippany, NJ. Tickets for all these events are available on our website plus… ‘Teddy-Love-Adult-Toys' will be onsite for the ShareNation September event. Go to our Affiliate page to check out their products for a 20% discount.Best of all you can join us on the April 2027 Bliss Cruise with our Posse! Book on our website for a Special Perk!!Visit our Website, LifestyleLynx.com, Events Page 2, for Information and Booking for our ‘LifestyleLynx Invades the Bliss Cruise'. Plus, details on the next IPG and ShareNation Events.Visit us at https://www.LifestyleLynx.com for related Adult Events, Cruises, Resorts, Clubs, Parties, Swinger Websites and more...

Send us a textThe mobile prosthetic clinic model is gaining traction as Hanger acquires Colorado-based Agile Orthopedics, potentially changing how prosthetic care is delivered nationwide. Raise3D's new RMS-220 SLS printer enters the market with open material capabilities, challenging the economics of small-scale prosthetic production.• Mobile clinics solve transportation challenges for patients with mobility limitations• Bringing care directly to patients is especially valuable in rural areas with weather challenges• Centralized fabrication pairs perfectly with mobile clinical services• Hanger could dramatically expand market reach by adding mobile clinics to existing locations• Open-material 3D printers may help control costs when material prices increase but reimbursement doesn't• Entry-level SLS systems face challenges with powder handling and economic viability• Lattice structures should be used thoughtfully based on function, not just aesthetics• Using others' designs without permission demonstrates disrespect for intellectual propertyJoin us next time as we continue exploring innovations in prosthetics and orthotics. Remember to subscribe to the podcast and share with colleagues who might benefit from these discussions.Special thanks to Advanced 3D for sponsoring this episode.Support the show

Jaksossa sukelletaan arkistojen aarteisiin ja pohditaan, minkälainen maailmamme olisi ilman arkistoja ja mitä arkistot elämäämme antavat. Pohdimme jaksossa, minkälainen perinne oli kruunuhäiden järjestäminen ja mitä Ruotsiin lähetetyistä sotalapsista tiedetään. Miksi Runeberg raapusti Maamme-laulun sanat pienelle paperinpalalle ja minkälaisia aineistoja kartanoista löytyy? Pohdimme näiden tarinoiden ohella, minkälainen prosessi käytännössä on vastaanottaa aineistoa arkistoon sekä mitä tarkoittaa arkistopedagogiikka. Jakson vieraina ovat SLS:n arkistonjohtaja Kristina Linnovaara ja arkistonhoitaja Maria Miinalainen. Jakso on toteutettu kaupallisessa yhteistyössä Svenska Litteratursällskapet i Finland kanssa. Seuraa podcastia somessa Instagramissa, Facebookissa ja Blueskyssa! Lue lisää jaksosta osoitteessa lottavuorio.com!Read more #126 Arkiston aarteita ja elävää iäisyyttä →

The White House recently released its budget for FY 2026, which has led to significant concerns at NASA as it recommends significant cuts to international programs, education, and research. In addition, many of these cuts call for the cancellation of key elements of NASA's Artemis Program and its plans for sending crewed missions to Mars. This includes the Space Launch System (SLS), the Orion spacecraft, and the Lunar Gateway.

Jonny likes a Swedish restomod while Richard has seen something horrific in Los Angeles. Also in this episode, love for the Discovery 4, trying to understand the Land Rover range, old SLs on high suspension, the car owning path of Cossie man, trying to decipher the stages of tuning, the Merkur XR4Ti, a Scottish verbal tic, a very weird listener story about a Polo and a lunatic, and Jonny and Richard pick two more cars from the Pistonheads auctions. For early, ad-free episodes and extra content go to patreon.com/smithandsniff To buy merch and tickets to live podcast recordings go to smithandsniff.com To discuss the Pistonheads auctions go to pistonheads.com/smithandsniff Get bonus content on Patreon Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

I denne RumNyt skal vi blandt andet høre om kæmpe solar flares, om kinesiske rum-computere, og om mulige kandidater til en ekstra planet i Solsystemet. Og i vores hovedhistorie sætter vi fokus på nogle af de mange nuværende og kommende missioner, der har fokus på at kigge efter exoplaneter og ikke mindst deres atmosfærer – fra CoRoT til Habitable Worlds Observatory. Vi sender også en særlig tanke til Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, der næsten er færdig, men måske bliver slagtet af Trump-administrationen... Lyt med

It's time for Rod and Tariq to catch up on headlines... and space dad jokes! We're going to update you on the ever-slimming NASA budget, the latest news on the Voyager spacecraft, what's up with the SLS, Orion capsule, and Artemis programs? SpaceX's 9th Starship test flight, AliBaba in orbit, and the end of the universe. And more space jokes than ever for you to choke on. Gilmore Space Launch Attempt: Gilmore Space's Ares rocket experienced a payload fairing separation on the pad before launch. NASA Budget Cuts & Artemis Program: Proposed budget cuts threaten NASA's Space Launch System (SLS), Orion capsule, and Lunar Gateway, sparking debate about the future of the Artemis program and a potential shift towards commercial solutions. Voyager 1 Thrusters: After 21 years of inactivity, Voyager 1 successfully fired its backup thrusters, ensuring continued communication from interstellar space. NASA Advisory Groups React: NASA advisory groups, including the Mars Exploration Program Advisory Group, expressed concern over budget cuts and their potential to hinder U.S. leadership in space exploration. Texas MARS Act: Texas Senator John Cornyn proposed allocating $1 billion for modernizing the Johnson Space Center. Intuitive Machines Update: Intuitive Machines plans to return to the moon in Q1 2026 with Intuitive Machines 3, having identified and addressed the causes of previous landing failures. SpaceX Starship Update: Elon Musk will provide an update on SpaceX's Mars plans before the next Starship test flight, frlight 9, addressing challenges like refueling the vehicle in space. The End of the Universe: Astrophysicists predict the universe's end, or "heat death", will occur sooner than previously thought, approximately 10 to the power of 78 years from now. China's Orbital Computing Sats: China launched its first 12 orbital computing satellites, part of a planned 2,800-satellite constellation designed to shift power-hungry computing and AI capabilities off-planet. Starlink Profitability: SpaceX's Starlink satellite internet business has generated $11.8 billion in revenue in 2024, surpassing its space transportation business. VIPER Lunar Rover: NASA may be working to save the VIPER lunar prospecting rover mission, which was previously canceled due to lander delays. Solar Flare Activity: The sun has unleashed a strong solar flare, an X2.7 magnitude, with the potential for increased auroras on Earth. Auroras on Mars: Perseverance rover images reveal the first visible light auroras on Mars from the planet's surface. Virgin Galactic Update: Virgin Galactic plans to launch its new Spaceship Delta fleet in early 2026 and resume ticket sales, with prices increases to come. Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Download or subscribe to This Week in Space at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free shows, a members-only Discord, and behind-the-scenes access. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit

It's time for Rod and Tariq to catch up on headlines... and space dad jokes! We're going to update you on the ever-slimming NASA budget, the latest news on the Voyager spacecraft, what's up with the SLS, Orion capsule, and Artemis programs? SpaceX's 9th Starship test flight, AliBaba in orbit, and the end of the universe. And more space jokes than ever for you to choke on. Gilmore Space Launch Attempt: Gilmore Space's Ares rocket experienced a payload fairing separation on the pad before launch. NASA Budget Cuts & Artemis Program: Proposed budget cuts threaten NASA's Space Launch System (SLS), Orion capsule, and Lunar Gateway, sparking debate about the future of the Artemis program and a potential shift towards commercial solutions. Voyager 1 Thrusters: After 21 years of inactivity, Voyager 1 successfully fired its backup thrusters, ensuring continued communication from interstellar space. NASA Advisory Groups React: NASA advisory groups, including the Mars Exploration Program Advisory Group, expressed concern over budget cuts and their potential to hinder U.S. leadership in space exploration. Texas MARS Act: Texas Senator John Cornyn proposed allocating $1 billion for modernizing the Johnson Space Center. Intuitive Machines Update: Intuitive Machines plans to return to the moon in Q1 2026 with Intuitive Machines 3, having identified and addressed the causes of previous landing failures. SpaceX Starship Update: Elon Musk will provide an update on SpaceX's Mars plans before the next Starship test flight, frlight 9, addressing challenges like refueling the vehicle in space. The End of the Universe: Astrophysicists predict the universe's end, or "heat death", will occur sooner than previously thought, approximately 10 to the power of 78 years from now. China's Orbital Computing Sats: China launched its first 12 orbital computing satellites, part of a planned 2,800-satellite constellation designed to shift power-hungry computing and AI capabilities off-planet. Starlink Profitability: SpaceX's Starlink satellite internet business has generated $11.8 billion in revenue in 2024, surpassing its space transportation business. VIPER Lunar Rover: NASA may be working to save the VIPER lunar prospecting rover mission, which was previously canceled due to lander delays. Solar Flare Activity: The sun has unleashed a strong solar flare, an X2.7 magnitude, with the potential for increased auroras on Earth. Auroras on Mars: Perseverance rover images reveal the first visible light auroras on Mars from the planet's surface. Virgin Galactic Update: Virgin Galactic plans to launch its new Spaceship Delta fleet in early 2026 and resume ticket sales, with prices increases to come. Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Download or subscribe to This Week in Space at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free shows, a members-only Discord, and behind-the-scenes access. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit

It's time for Rod and Tariq to catch up on headlines... and space dad jokes! We're going to update you on the ever-slimming NASA budget, the latest news on the Voyager spacecraft, what's up with the SLS, Orion capsule, and Artemis programs? SpaceX's 9th Starship test flight, AliBaba in orbit, and the end of the universe. And more space jokes than ever for you to choke on. Gilmore Space Launch Attempt: Gilmore Space's Ares rocket experienced a payload fairing separation on the pad before launch. NASA Budget Cuts & Artemis Program: Proposed budget cuts threaten NASA's Space Launch System (SLS), Orion capsule, and Lunar Gateway, sparking debate about the future of the Artemis program and a potential shift towards commercial solutions. Voyager 1 Thrusters: After 21 years of inactivity, Voyager 1 successfully fired its backup thrusters, ensuring continued communication from interstellar space. NASA Advisory Groups React: NASA advisory groups, including the Mars Exploration Program Advisory Group, expressed concern over budget cuts and their potential to hinder U.S. leadership in space exploration. Texas MARS Act: Texas Senator John Cornyn proposed allocating $1 billion for modernizing the Johnson Space Center. Intuitive Machines Update: Intuitive Machines plans to return to the moon in Q1 2026 with Intuitive Machines 3, having identified and addressed the causes of previous landing failures. SpaceX Starship Update: Elon Musk will provide an update on SpaceX's Mars plans before the next Starship test flight, frlight 9, addressing challenges like refueling the vehicle in space. The End of the Universe: Astrophysicists predict the universe's end, or "heat death", will occur sooner than previously thought, approximately 10 to the power of 78 years from now. China's Orbital Computing Sats: China launched its first 12 orbital computing satellites, part of a planned 2,800-satellite constellation designed to shift power-hungry computing and AI capabilities off-planet. Starlink Profitability: SpaceX's Starlink satellite internet business has generated $11.8 billion in revenue in 2024, surpassing its space transportation business. VIPER Lunar Rover: NASA may be working to save the VIPER lunar prospecting rover mission, which was previously canceled due to lander delays. Solar Flare Activity: The sun has unleashed a strong solar flare, an X2.7 magnitude, with the potential for increased auroras on Earth. Auroras on Mars: Perseverance rover images reveal the first visible light auroras on Mars from the planet's surface. Virgin Galactic Update: Virgin Galactic plans to launch its new Spaceship Delta fleet in early 2026 and resume ticket sales, with prices increases to come. Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Download or subscribe to This Week in Space at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free shows, a members-only Discord, and behind-the-scenes access. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit

Er der mon liv derude, og hvordan kan vi overhovedet finde det? Det er et af de helt store spørgsmål , ikke bare for rumnørder, men for alle mennesker på kloden. I denne episode sætter vi fokus på såkaldte biosignaturer – altså de tegn vi kan lede efter, som måske kan være spor efter liv. I vores eget solsystem leder vi fx efter liv i prøver der indsamles på Mars, men udenfor vores eget solsystem kan vi ikke ‘bare' sende robotter afsted for at indsamle prøver. Her er vores eneste mulighed at lede efter biosignaturer, fx ved at analysere lys der kommer ned til os igennem fjerne exoplaneters atmosfærer. Vi har haft besøg i studiet af Nanna Bach-Møller, der er post. doc på Niels Bohr Institutet på Københavns Universitet, og som især arbejder med at lave computersimulationer af atmosfærer for at finde biosignaturer. I de korte rumnyheder skal vi blandt andet tale SphereX, Proba-3 og de hårde nedskæringer hos NASA. Lyt med

The USSR Zombie probe will likely make landfall this weekend. NASA is ready to explore Titan witha very large drone. Japan's Resilence lunar lander has entered the Moon's orbit. SLS has stacked the second stage of Artemis 2 but it looks like funding will run out for SLS after Artemis 3. SpaceX has gotten permission from the FAA for 25 Starship launches per year. Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/made-of-stars--4746260/support.

Mark Albrecht joins me to talk about his time on the Trump 2024 Transition Team, the thinking behind some of the policy decisions we're starting to see in the space and national security spheres, and more.This episode of Main Engine Cut Off is brought to you by 33 executive producers—Joonas, The Astrogators at SEE, Will and Lars from Agile, Theo and Violet, Frank, Russell, Kris, Bob, Lee, Pat, Ryan, Fred, Matt, Heiko, Pat from KC, Joakim (Jo-Kim), Donald, Josh from Impulse, Stealth Julian, Jan, Steve, Better Every Day Studios, Warren, David, Joel, Natasha Tsakos (pronounced Tszakos), Tim Dodd (the Everyday Astronaut!), and four anonymous—and hundreds of supporters.TopicsMark Albrecht (@MarkAlbrecht68) / XFalling Back To Earth: A First Hand Account Of The Great Space Race And The End Of The Cold War: Albrecht, Mark: 9780615447094: Amazon.com: BooksMark Albrecht on X: “Today concludes my service for the 47 transition team (4th time) We have charted a bold, aggressive, and urgent agenda for civil and national security space based on the direction and guidance of President Trump. It will be a golden era of US Space exploration, innovation…”Second Trump administration begins with confusion on acting NASA leadership - SpaceNewsWhite House budget proposal would phase out SLS and Orion, scale back ISS operations - SpaceNewsNASA budget proposal draws strong criticism - SpaceNewsSpace Force chief makes case for increased funding before House panel - SpaceNewsThe ShowLike the show? Support the show on Patreon or Substack!Email your thoughts, comments, and questions to anthony@mainenginecutoff.comFollow @WeHaveMECOFollow @meco@spacey.space on MastodonListen to MECO HeadlinesListen to Off-NominalJoin the Off-Nominal DiscordSubscribe on Apple Podcasts, Overcast, Pocket Casts, Spotify, Google Play, Stitcher, TuneIn or elsewhereSubscribe to the Main Engine Cut Off NewsletterArtwork photo by NASAWork with me and my design and development agency: Pine Works

We cover UFC, WSL, SLS, F1, Tension BTS and some cool shows/podcasts    For our listeners: Varsity Sports Bar! https://www.varsity.com.au   25% off Rusty TradeR work wear use code: TRADERGRINREAPERS at www.rusty.com.au/traderworkwear 25% off New Rusty wetsuits  - use code: GRINREAPERS25 at www.rusty.com.au/wetsuits Rusty Locals Only: https://rusty.com.au/collections/locals-only Use code: REAPERS at https://au.manscaped.com/ for 20% discount Support: https://www.patreon.com/ChrisWhitey https://www.patreon.com/BrianShields Grin Reapers Tshirt: http://www.theoceanpeople.com/product/the-grin-reapers-shirt Other Links:  https://www.instagram.com/chris.whitey https://www.instagram.com/brianshields_ https://www.instagram.com/grin_reapers https://www.facebook.com/GrinReapersMedia/ email: theoceanpeopleorders@gmail.com https://itunes.apple.com/au/podcast/the-grin-reapers-podcast/id1380019049

Seems we can't go through an hour without hearing news about artificial intelligence these days. There are a lot of exciting developments, and some of the most exciting when thinking about space are coming from the USRA's Research Institute for Advanced Computer Science (RIACS), which is on the cutting edge of the cutting edge. In this episode, we're speaking with the institute's director, Dr. David Bell, who will walk us through the differences between current AI, agentic AI, and--are you ready?--quantum-powered AI, and their current and future potential to revolutionize space exploration and development. Join us!Headlines Trump budget cuts: The Trump administration's fiscal 2026 "skinny" budget proposes slashing NASA's funding by $6 billion—24 % of its current $24.8 billion—threatening SLS, Orion, Gateway, and Mars Sample Return programs. Planet 9 revival: Scientists re-examining 1980s IRAS and 2006–2011 Akari infrared data have uncovered new gravitational signatures suggesting a hidden Planet 9 at ~700 AU, bringing the search closer to confirmation. Speed-round catch-up: NASA's Psyche asteroid mission is battling low fuel pressure; the decades-old Soviet Cosmos 42 Venus probe is slated to re-enter around May 10; and a recent poll finds over half of Gen Z and millennials believe in alien cover-ups. Main Topic – AI in Space with Dr. David Bell USRA & QuAIL overview: Dr. Bell outlines USRA's Research Institute for Advanced Computer Science (RIACS) and its Quantum Artificial Intelligence Lab—a collaboration with Google and NASA Ames driving AI and quantum computing integration in space missions Career path & pivotal shifts: With 20+ years at USRA and a prior decade at Xerox PARC, Bell traces AI's journey from 1959's first neural nets to the 2017 transformer breakthrough that sparked today's LLM revolution. Early AI successes: AutoClass's unsupervised learning on the 1980s IRAS mission discovered a new class of infrared stars, and ExoMiner's deep-learning engine has since validated over 300 exoplanets from Kepler data. Agent-based autonomy: USRA deployed mobile agents on the ISS to automate file transfers and Deep Space One's Remote Agent performed onboard planning, execution, and anomaly recovery in deep space during the 1990s. Evolution of planning & scheduling: The Europa planning engine—used daily for Mars rovers—has evolved into SPIFe (Spiffy) and real-time collaborative "playbook" apps, optimizing workflows on both robotic and crewed missions. Natural language interfaces: Clarissa, a precursor to Siri deployed on the ISS five years before commercial voice assistants, let astronauts query and navigate complex procedures by voice. Robotic assistants: Projects like Astrobee free-flying robots on the ISS and analog-terrain rover simulations demonstrate how AI-driven machines can support astronauts in exploration and maintenance tasks. Foundation models for Earth & space: USRA's Generative AI Lab is building multipurpose foundation models on global satellite data that now outperform traditional numerical simulations—forecasting weather faster and more accurately. Workforce development: Through the Feynman Quantum Academy and NASA-integrated data science curricula, USRA immerses students These show notes have been truncated due to length. For the full show notes, visit https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space/episodes/159 Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Guest: Dr. David Bell

Seems we can't go through an hour without hearing news about artificial intelligence these days. There are a lot of exciting developments, and some of the most exciting when thinking about space are coming from the USRA's Research Institute for Advanced Computer Science (RIACS), which is on the cutting edge of the cutting edge. In this episode, we're speaking with the institute's director, Dr. David Bell, who will walk us through the differences between current AI, agentic AI, and--are you ready?--quantum-powered AI, and their current and future potential to revolutionize space exploration and development. Join us!Headlines Trump budget cuts: The Trump administration's fiscal 2026 "skinny" budget proposes slashing NASA's funding by $6 billion—24 % of its current $24.8 billion—threatening SLS, Orion, Gateway, and Mars Sample Return programs. Planet 9 revival: Scientists re-examining 1980s IRAS and 2006–2011 Akari infrared data have uncovered new gravitational signatures suggesting a hidden Planet 9 at ~700 AU, bringing the search closer to confirmation. Speed-round catch-up: NASA's Psyche asteroid mission is battling low fuel pressure; the decades-old Soviet Cosmos 42 Venus probe is slated to re-enter around May 10; and a recent poll finds over half of Gen Z and millennials believe in alien cover-ups. Main Topic – AI in Space with Dr. David Bell USRA & QuAIL overview: Dr. Bell outlines USRA's Research Institute for Advanced Computer Science (RIACS) and its Quantum Artificial Intelligence Lab—a collaboration with Google and NASA Ames driving AI and quantum computing integration in space missions Career path & pivotal shifts: With 20+ years at USRA and a prior decade at Xerox PARC, Bell traces AI's journey from 1959's first neural nets to the 2017 transformer breakthrough that sparked today's LLM revolution. Early AI successes: AutoClass's unsupervised learning on the 1980s IRAS mission discovered a new class of infrared stars, and ExoMiner's deep-learning engine has since validated over 300 exoplanets from Kepler data. Agent-based autonomy: USRA deployed mobile agents on the ISS to automate file transfers and Deep Space One's Remote Agent performed onboard planning, execution, and anomaly recovery in deep space during the 1990s. Evolution of planning & scheduling: The Europa planning engine—used daily for Mars rovers—has evolved into SPIFe (Spiffy) and real-time collaborative "playbook" apps, optimizing workflows on both robotic and crewed missions. Natural language interfaces: Clarissa, a precursor to Siri deployed on the ISS five years before commercial voice assistants, let astronauts query and navigate complex procedures by voice. Robotic assistants: Projects like Astrobee free-flying robots on the ISS and analog-terrain rover simulations demonstrate how AI-driven machines can support astronauts in exploration and maintenance tasks. Foundation models for Earth & space: USRA's Generative AI Lab is building multipurpose foundation models on global satellite data that now outperform traditional numerical simulations—forecasting weather faster and more accurately. Workforce development: Through the Feynman Quantum Academy and NASA-integrated data science curricula, USRA immerses students These show notes have been truncated due to length. For the full show notes, visit https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space/episodes/159 Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Guest: Dr. David Bell

Seems we can't go through an hour without hearing news about artificial intelligence these days. There are a lot of exciting developments, and some of the most exciting when thinking about space are coming from the USRA's Research Institute for Advanced Computer Science (RIACS), which is on the cutting edge of the cutting edge. In this episode, we're speaking with the institute's director, Dr. David Bell, who will walk us through the differences between current AI, agentic AI, and--are you ready?--quantum-powered AI, and their current and future potential to revolutionize space exploration and development. Join us!Headlines Trump budget cuts: The Trump administration's fiscal 2026 "skinny" budget proposes slashing NASA's funding by $6 billion—24 % of its current $24.8 billion—threatening SLS, Orion, Gateway, and Mars Sample Return programs. Planet 9 revival: Scientists re-examining 1980s IRAS and 2006–2011 Akari infrared data have uncovered new gravitational signatures suggesting a hidden Planet 9 at ~700 AU, bringing the search closer to confirmation. Speed-round catch-up: NASA's Psyche asteroid mission is battling low fuel pressure; the decades-old Soviet Cosmos 42 Venus probe is slated to re-enter around May 10; and a recent poll finds over half of Gen Z and millennials believe in alien cover-ups. Main Topic – AI in Space with Dr. David Bell USRA & QuAIL overview: Dr. Bell outlines USRA's Research Institute for Advanced Computer Science (RIACS) and its Quantum Artificial Intelligence Lab—a collaboration with Google and NASA Ames driving AI and quantum computing integration in space missions Career path & pivotal shifts: With 20+ years at USRA and a prior decade at Xerox PARC, Bell traces AI's journey from 1959's first neural nets to the 2017 transformer breakthrough that sparked today's LLM revolution. Early AI successes: AutoClass's unsupervised learning on the 1980s IRAS mission discovered a new class of infrared stars, and ExoMiner's deep-learning engine has since validated over 300 exoplanets from Kepler data. Agent-based autonomy: USRA deployed mobile agents on the ISS to automate file transfers and Deep Space One's Remote Agent performed onboard planning, execution, and anomaly recovery in deep space during the 1990s. Evolution of planning & scheduling: The Europa planning engine—used daily for Mars rovers—has evolved into SPIFe (Spiffy) and real-time collaborative "playbook" apps, optimizing workflows on both robotic and crewed missions. Natural language interfaces: Clarissa, a precursor to Siri deployed on the ISS five years before commercial voice assistants, let astronauts query and navigate complex procedures by voice. Robotic assistants: Projects like Astrobee free-flying robots on the ISS and analog-terrain rover simulations demonstrate how AI-driven machines can support astronauts in exploration and maintenance tasks. Foundation models for Earth & space: USRA's Generative AI Lab is building multipurpose foundation models on global satellite data that now outperform traditional numerical simulations—forecasting weather faster and more accurately. Workforce development: Through the Feynman Quantum Academy and NASA-integrated data science curricula, USRA immerses students These show notes have been truncated due to length. For the full show notes, visit https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space/episodes/159 Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Guest: Dr. David Bell

Welcome to our Open Lines discussion covering many topics Note my message for a Drupal 7 expert to assist in maintaining our website. If you are that person or know someone please refer them to me. We talked about the suggested NASA science cuts, the Roman telescope and the size of its mirror. Another topic was the Russian "nuclear" possible satellite that is reported tumbling and out of control. There was much speculation about the purpose of this satellite per the Reuters article. Michael Listner, Atty, called in to help clarify the satellite situation for us. Fremont John called about the space budget plus he uploaded several great documents to the blog for this program. John had additional topics for us that he mentioned. Artemis was a topic as was the FH plan suggested and promoted by Dr. Kothari on many programs and with other formats. We talked about China and their lunar plans plus the possibility we just move on to Mars leaving the Moon for China. Ft. Worth John brought us some of the SLS and Orion issues plus some of the FH constraints were it selected as the return to the Moon architecture. Please read the full summary of the program when it appears at www.thespaceshow.com for this date, Sunday, April 27, 2025.

Pri nas in mnogih drugih državah je danes dan žalovanja za papežem Frančiškom, ki so ga pokopali v rimski baziliki Marije Snežne. Pred tem je na osrednjem vatikanskem trgu potekala pogrebna slovesnost z množično udeležbo vernikov, duhovščine in tujih delegacij. Vodil jo je dekan kardinalskega zbora Giovanni Battista Re, ki je v svoji pridigi poudaril, da je bil Frančišek papež sredi ljudi, z odprtim srcem za vse. Ostali poudarki oddaje: Trump in Zelenski sta se pred pogrebom srečala v Baziliki svetega Petra. Finančni minister Boštjančič kritičen do počasnega iskanja novega guvernerja Banke Slovenije. Po odstopu Marka Balažica in Nine Strah za vodenje stranke SLS izvoljena Tina Bregant.

Episode 24: UntaintedApril 2025‘Main Topic': A Facebook Post on our LifestyleLynx page prompted us to record this episodes' Main Topic, ‘Untainted'. The post centered around the Lifestyle having become a ‘cesspool' for this person. What we say?? We drive into how to forge your own destiny in finding what works best for you in the Lifestyle and surrounding yourself with like-minded people. Using our experiences with our 300+ drams free, fun, adult tribe, we debunk that notion and provide ways to improve your situation.‘What Have We Done Lately': A very successful group outing to Atlantic City, NJ with eight couples that encompass two birthday celebrations plus more people joining in from a SLS ‘Hot Date' posting for a crazy, insane time at “Boogie Nights” in the Tropicana Casino Resort!  Then a week later, dinner with great friends that led into a club event with more friends to hear a cool band! ‘Where We Are Going Next': Heading to a repeat house party in Pennsylvania with great friends and sexy people that we want more quality time with, in that way, well you know. It's really close to our ‘Gynormous' Group Trip to Temptation Resort Cancun, Mexico May 1-5, 2025. There is still time to join us on this amazing trip to Paradise!  If you cannot attend there are two other options available on May 2-3; an ‘Intimate Parties Group' event in Scranton PA and a ‘ShareNation' event in Hampton, New Hampshire. Also, get ready for the new Grand Hotel for the ShareNation ‘White Party' on July 11-12. Tickets will be available soon on our website plus… ‘TeddyLoveAdultToys' will be onsite for this event. Go to our website to check out their fabulous products.Visit our Website, LifestyleLynx.com, Events Page 2, for Information and Booking Trips, Crusies and Parties.Visit us at https://www.LifestyleLynx.com for related Adult Events, Cruises, Resorts, Clubs, Parties, Swinger Websites and more...

Bob return for multi-topic discussion ranging from the recent successful Blue Origin all woman suborbital flight to the latest with NASA budget and science cut rumors, Jared Isaacman hearings for NASA Administrator, Starship demos, repairs, Artemis good and bad, possible SLS, Orion and Gateway cuts and much more. Bob spent lots of time with his analysis of the pending Nancy Roman telescope which is rumored to be on the budget cutting list though Bob see the OMB rumored and leaked news as a Trump administration negotiating tactic. Bob talked about the need to clean house regarding costly, overdue and not so necessary NASA and other government projects and continued as he always does to support private commercial everything over government. We talked about the private space station efforts on the part of VAST, cislunar development, and other recent human spaceflight missions Bob said many times that the F9 was approaching airline like operations. For threats to commercial space, he focused in on excessive regulations. Listen to the entire program for all our discussion points. Please read the summary at www.thespaceshow.com when posted at www.thespaceshow.com for this date, Tuesday, April 15, 2025.

In this episode, Kelsey chats with Mary Ellen from the Wonderland on Points podcast and @familytravel4thewin on Instagram to hear all about her family of 5's 4-night getaway to the Grand Hyatt Baha Mar in the Bahamas. Traveling in January 2025, Mary Ellen shares how she booked both flights and hotel entirely on points, plus her tips for saving on food while still enjoying the best the resort has to offer. From daily fun at the Baha Bay waterpark (included in your stay!) to choosing budget-friendly dining options and navigating the resort with kids of all ages, this episode is packed with helpful insights for families dreaming of a warm-weather escape.Mentioned in this episode:- LINK to $25 travel toddler cot: https://amzlink.to/az01SvOlw8T3Z- LINK to big-kid inflatable (with foot) sleeping mat: https://amzlink.to/az0wCGVzlVgpS- LINK to flat-packed sand toys: https://urlgeni.us/amzn/qhZqz- Baha Mar Resort Hotels: Rosewood, SLS, Grand Hyatt- Baha Bay Waterpark- Hyatt Guest of Honor Reward and Hyatt Globalist Status- Kraven App- John Batiste's Jazz Club at Baha Mar- FlightConnections.com- Mary Ellen's Facebook Group: Traveling on PointsBUY ME A COFFEE to show your support for the Trip Tales podcast! https://www.buymeacoffee.com/kelseygravesFOLLOW: Kelsey on Instagram & TikTokSHOP: Kelsey's Travel Favorites from her Amazon storefront.SHARE: About your trip on the Trip Tales podcast: triptalespodcast@gmail.com PARTNER DISCOUNT CODESCOZY EARTH - 40% off Bamboo Sheets that feel like hotel luxury with code: CE-KELSEYGRAVES BLING2O - 10% OFF Bling2o kids ski or swim goggles with code: KELSEYSPANX.COM - Use code KGRAVESXSPANX for 15% OFF full-price items and FREE SHIPPING. My current fav travel outfit is the Air Essentials Jumpsuit. CHASE SAPPHIRE CREDIT CARD - My preferred points earning credit card and a great card for newbies entering the points & miles space to get started. Ope...

NASA's Artemis II mission is a step closer to ready for launch in 2026 as its twin boosters have been attached inside the VAB at Kennedy Space Center. SpaceX has broken some of its own records including using the same booster on launches only 9 days apart. NASA's Curiosity rover has detected the largest organic compounds ever found on Mars. JWST has given us a great new look at the Cosmic Tornado. Star Catcher has successfully demonstrated wireless energy beaming. Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/made-of-stars--4746260/support.

In his famous 1962 address to Rice University, President Kennedy declared,We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard . . .The current administration has chosen, among other things, to go to Mars. Some, Elon Musk included, are looking for a backup planet to Earth. For others, like Robert Zubrin, Mars is an opportunity for scientific discovery, pure challenge, and a revitalized human civilization.Today on Faster, Please — The Podcast, Zubrin and I discuss how to reorient NASA, what our earliest Mars missions can and should look like, and why we should go to Mars at all.Zubrin is the president of aerospace R&D company Pioneer Astronautics, as well as the founder and president of the Mars Society. He was also formerly a staff engineer at Lockheed Martin. He has authored over 200 published papers and is the author of seven books, including the most recent, The New World on Mars: What We Can Create on the Red Planet.For more, check out Zubrin's article in The New Atlantis, “The Mars Dream is Back — Here's How to Make It Actually Happen.”In This Episode* Colonization vs. exploration (1:38)* A purpose-driven mission (5:01)* Cultural diversity on Mars (12:07)* An alternative to the SpaceX strategy (16:02)* Artemis program reform (20:42)* The myth of an independent Mars (24:17)* Our current timeline (27:21)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversation. Colonization vs. exploration (1:38)I do think that it is important that the first human mission to ours be a round-trip mission. I want to have those people back, not just because it's nice to have them back, but I want to hear from them. I want to get the full report.Pethokoukis: Just before we started chatting, I went and I checked an online prediction market — one I check for various things, the Metaculus online prediction market — and the consensus forecast from all the people in that community for when will the first humans land successfully on Mars was October 2042. Does that sound realistic, too soon, or should it be much further away?I think it is potentially realistic, but I think we could beat it. Right now we have a chance to get a Humans to Mars program launched. This current administration has announced that they intend to do so. They're making a claim they're going to land people on Mars in 2028. I do not think that is realistic, but I do believe that it is realistic for them to get the program well started and, if it is handled correctly — and we'll have to talk a lot more about that in this talk — that we could potentially land humans on Mars circa 2033.When I gave you that prediction and then you mentioned the 2020s goal, those are about landing on Mars. Should we assume when people say, “We're going to land on Mars,” they also mean people returning from Mars or are they talking about one-way trips?Musk has frequently talked about a colonization effort, and colonization is a one-way trip, but I don't think that's in the cards for 2028 or 2033. I think what is in the cards for this time period on our immediate horizon is exploration missions. I do think that we could potentially have a one-way mission with robots in 2028. That would take a lot of work and it's a bit optimistic, but I think it could be done with determination, and I think that should be done, actually.To be clear, when people are talking about the first human mission to Mars, the assumption is it's not a one way trip for that astronaut, or those two astronauts, that we intend on bringing them back. Maybe the answer is obvious, but I'm not sure it's obvious to me.From time to time, people have proposed scenarios where the first human mission to Mars is a one-way mission, you send maybe not two but five people. Then two years later you send five more people, and then you send 10 people, and then you send 20 people, and you build it up. In other words, it's not a one-way mission in the sense of you're going to be left there and your food will then run out and you will die. No, I don't think that is a credible or attractive mission plan, but the idea that you're going to go with a few people and then reinforce them and grow it into a base, and then a settlement. That is something that can be reasonably argued. But I still think even that is a bit premature. I do think that it is important that the first human mission to ours be a round-trip mission. I want to have those people back, not just because it's nice to have them back, but I want to hear from them. I want to get the full report.A purpose-driven mission (5:01)In the purpose-driven mode, the purpose comes first, you spend money to do things. In the vendor-driven mode, you do things in order to spend money. And we've seen both of these.So should we just default to [the idea] that this mission will be done with government funding on SpaceX rockets, and this will be a SpaceX trip? That's by far the most likely scenario? This is going to need to be a public-private partnership. SpaceX is rapidly developing the single most important element of the technology, but it's not all the technology. We need surface systems. We need the system for making rocket fuel on Mars because the SpaceX mission architecture is the one that I outlined in my book, The Case for Mars, where you make your return propellant on Mars: You take carbon dioxide and water, which are both available on Mars, and turn them into methane and oxygen, which is an excellent rocket fuel combination and which, in fact, is the rocket fuel combination that the Starship uses for that reason. So that's the plan, but you need the system that makes itWe're going to need surface power, which really should be a nuclear power source and which is difficult to develop outside of the government because we're talking about controlled material. Space nuclear reactors will need to use highly enriched uranium, so it should be a partnership between NASA and SpaceX, but we're going to have to reform NASA if this is going to work. I think, though, that this mission could be the vehicle by which we reform NASA. That is, that NASA Artemis moon program, for example, is an example of how not to do something.That's the current government plan to get us back to the moon.Right. But you see, NASA has two distinct modes of operation, and one I call the purpose-driven mode and the other is the vendor-driven mode. In the purpose-driven mode, the purpose comes first, you spend money to do things. In the vendor-driven mode, you do things in order to spend money. And we've seen both of these. To be fair, there's been times when NASA has operated with extreme efficiency to accomplish great things in very short amounts of time, of which, of course, the Apollo Program is the most well-known example where we got to the moon and eight years from program start. The difference between Apollo and Artemis was it wasn't human nature — and there were plenty of greedy people in the 1960s that, when the government's spending money, they want a piece of the action, they were all there.There's no shortage of people who, when you've got a lot of money to spend, are willing to show up and say, “Hi, you got a great idea, but you can't do it until you fund me.” And there were plenty of them then, but they were shown the door because it was clear that if we did all these side projects that people were trying to claim were necessary (“you can't do your program until you do my program”) we would not make it to the moon by 1969. So actually, the forcing function was the schedule. That's what forced the nonsense out of the room.Artemis, on the other hand, has been undertaken as a project whose leadership thought that they could secure a lot of support for the program if they gave a lot of people money. So Artemis has five different flight systems which are incompatible with each other. It's a ridiculous program. That's not the way to do things. We have to have a program leadership which is committed to humans-to-Mars not as a way to get pet technology programs funded, or pet constituencies funded, or pet vendors funded, or any of that stuff. It's got to be: the mission comes first. And if you have that kind of emphasis on this, this can be done and it can be the way to reform NASA.I liken NASA today to a peacetime military, but then it gets thrown into battle, and you get rid of your McClellans and you bring in your Grants. In other words, you have a certain period of chaos and disorganization because you've got deadwood running the place, but under the stress of actually beginning a decisive mission and not being tolerant of anything less than real performance, you actually get the army you need.So that sounds like that's a presidential decision, to give that agency a very specific goal, and perhaps a timeline, to create that kind of purpose-driven culture.Yes. Now that's one necessity. There's another necessity as well, which is that the conceptual base of this program, the political base, if you will, which is derived from its intellectual base, has got to be expanded. This cannot be seen as a Trump-Musk boondoggle because Trump and Musk have both defined themselves in extremely partisan terms, and if this is seen as their program and not America's program, it will be gone as soon as the political fortunes of war shift, which they always do. Musk has this concept that he's been promoting, which is the reason why we have to go to Mars is so that there'll be survivors on Mars after the Earth is destroyed, and I don't think this is particularly —You don't find that a compelling reason, given that there's not currently an obvious threat of us being destroyed, to run a program that could necessarily exist over multiple administrations and be quite expensive.That idea is derived from Isaac Asimov's Foundation novel: The scientists go to the planet Terminus so they can reestablish civilization after the Galactic Empire collapsed. It may please science-fiction fans, but I don't think it's attractive to the general public, and also, frankly, I don't think it's practical. I don't think a Mars colony could have a million people on Mars that will survive as an autarchy. There's no nation on earth that survives as an autarchy. The ones that try are extremely poor as a result for trying.The correct reason to go to Mars is, immediately, for the science, to find out the truth about the prevalence of diversity of life in the universe; for the challenge, to challenge our youth, learn your science and you can be an explorer and maker of new worlds; and for the future, but for the future, it's not for a few survivors to be hiding away after the earth is destroyed, it's to create a new branch, or perhaps several new branches, of human civilization which will add their creative inventiveness to human progress as a whole, as America did for Western civilization. By establishing America, you had a new branch of Western civilization which experimented in everything from democracy to light bulbs and airplanes and greatly enhanced human progress as a result.And the Martians, you are going to have a group of technologically adept people in a frontier environment that's going to challenge them. They're going to come up with lots of inventions that they need for their own progress, but which will benefit human as a whole. And that is why you should colonize Mars.Cultural diversity on Mars (12:07)I believe that there will . . . be many colonies on Mars established by different people with different ideas on what the ideal civilization should be, and the ones with the best ideas will attract the most immigrants and therefore outgrow the rest.It very much reminds me of the scenario laid out in The Expanse book and TV series where mankind has spread throughout the solar system. They're all branches of human civilization, but being out there has changed people, and Mars is different than Earth. Mars has a different society. The culture is different. I think that's a very interesting reason that I had not heard Elon Musk discuss.I have a book called The New World on Mars, which you might want to check out because I discuss this very thing. I believe that there will, once it's possible to colonize Mars, there'll be many colonies on Mars established by different people with different ideas on what the ideal civilization should be, and the ones with the best ideas will attract the most immigrants and therefore outgrow the rest. So, for example, the one thing I disagree with about The Expanse is they have this militaristic Spartan civilization on Mars.There's just one sort of universal culture.Yeah, and I don't think that that civilization would attract many immigrants. The reason why the American North outgrew the South is because the North was free. That's why all the immigrants went to the North. That's why the North won the Civil War, actually. It had a larger population of more industry because all the immigrants went there and became far more creative. This is a very good thing, that the form of civilization that ultimately prevails on Mars will be one, I think, that will offer human freedom and be the most attractive in as many other respects as possible. That's why it will prevail, because it will attract immigrants.But I want to get back to this program. If it is possible not to land humans on Mars in 2028, but to land — if you can land Starship on Mars, you can land not a robot, but a robotic expedition.Starship, Musk claims it could land 100 tons on Mars. Let's say it could land 30. That's 30 times as much as we can currently land. The JPL (Jet Propulsion Laboratory)-led Mars science community, they're still thinking about Mars exploration in the terms it's been done since the '60s, which is single spacecraft on single rockets. Imagine you can now land an entire expedition. You land 30 rovers on Mars along with 30 helicopters that are well instrumented and a well instrumented science lab in it. So now you are bringing not only heavy lift, but heavy lander capability to the Mars science program, and now you have a robotic expedition on Mars. For every instrument that made it onto perseverance, there were 10 that were proposed because they could only take six, and like 100 teams wanted to get their instruments on the rover. So imagine now we can actually land 30 rovers and 30 helicopters, not little ones like Ingenuity, but ones that can carry five or six instruments each themselves.So now you have 100 science teams, you've got life-detection experiments, you've got ground penetrating radar, you've got all sorts of things that we haven't done on Mars all being done. You're expanding Mars science by two orders of magnitude by bringing into existence the kind of transportation capability that is necessary to enable humans to Mars. So now you bring on board the science community and the science-interested public, which includes all parts of the political spectrum, but frankly it leans somewhat left, overall — university scientists, people like this.So now this isn't just about Elon Musk, the Bond villain. This is about what we as America and we as a culture which is committed to pushing the boundaries of science. This is what we are doing. It's not what SpaceX is doing, it's not what Musk is doing, it's not what Trump is doing, it's what America is doing, and celebrating the highest values of Western civilization, which is the search for truth.An alternative to the SpaceX strategy (16:02)Starship plus Starboat is the flight hardware combination that can do both the moon and Mars.That said — and we're talking about this being a public-private partnership —should we just default into thinking that the private part is SpaceX?Well, SpaceX is one part of it. There's no question, to me anyway —There's other companies that are building rockets, there's other rocket companies, maybe they aren't talking about Mars, but Blue Origin's building rockets.I think it should be fairly competed, but SpaceX is well ahead of anyone else in terms of a booster capability. That said, I think that the mission architecture that Musk has proposed, while workable, is not optimal, that there needs to be another vehicle here. He's got the Starship, I want to have a Starboat. I've written an article about this, which was just published in The New Atlantis.Basically, the problem with Musk's architecture is that the direct return from Mars using a Starship, which is a 100-ton vehicle, would require manufacturing 600 tons of methane oxygen on the surface of Mars, and if that's to be done in a reasonable amount of time, requires 600 kilowatts, which is about 13 football fields of solar panels, which means we're not doing it with solar panels, which means it has to be done with a nuke, and that then adds a lot to the development.If we had a Starboat, which is something 10 to 20 percent the size of Starship, but it would go from Mars orbit to the surface and we refuel it, and then it is what takes the crew down to the surface — although the crew could go one way to the surface in a Starship, that's okay, but whether they go down in a Starship or down in a Starboat, they come up in a Starboat, and now you're reducing the propellant requirement by an order of magnitude. It makes this whole thing work much better. And furthermore, Starship plus Starboat also enables the moon.We've forgotten about the moon in this conversation.Starship plus Starboat is the flight hardware combination that can do both the moon and Mars. If you take the Starship version of the Artemis thing, it takes 10 to 14 Starship launches to land a single crew on Mars refueling Starship on orbit, then refueling it in lunar orbit, and with tankers that have to be refueled in earth orbit, and doing all this, it's crazy. But if you positioned one Starship tanker in lunar orbit and then used that to refuel Starboats going up and down, you could do many missions to the lunar surface from a single Starship positioned in lunar orbit. Once again, Starship is suboptimal as an ascent vehicle to come back from the moon or Mars because it's so heavy. It's a hundred tons. The lunar excursion module we used in Apollo was two tons. So we make the Starboat — Starship plus Starboat gives you both the moon and Mars.Here's the thing: With rockets, you measure propulsion requirements in units we call delta V, velocity changes. That's what rockets actually do, they change your velocity, they accelerate you, they decelerate you. To go down from lunar orbit to the lunar surface is two kilometers a second. Delta V to come back up is two kilometers a second. Roundtrip is four. To go down from Mars orbit to the Martian surface is practically nothing because there's an atmosphere that'll slow you down without using your rocket. To come up is four. So the round trip on Mars and the round trip from orbit to the surface on the moon are the same, and therefore the same combination of the Starship plus the Starboat as a landing craft and, in particular, ascent vehicle (because ascent is where small is beautiful), this will give us both. So we don't have to wreck the moon program in order to do Mars. On the contrary, we can rationalize it.I mentioned one group of potential enemies this program has been the anti-Musk Democrats. The other group of enemies that this program has are the moon people who are very upset that their moon program is about to be wrecked because Musk says the moon is a diversion. Now, if it was a choice between the moon and Mars, then I would choose Mars. But we can do both. We can do both and without it being a diversion, because we can do both with the same ships.Artemis program reform (20:42)SLS was worth a lot in its time, but its time was the '90s, not now.There's been some talk about canceling — I'm not sure how serious it is — the Artemis program. If we want the next person on the moon to be an American rather than a Chinese, do we need to keep Artemis to make sure that happens?We need to reform Artemis and this is the way to do it: Starship plus Starboat will give you the moon.Aren't we under a time constraint, given that if we are competing and if we think for whatever national pride reasons we want the next person on the moon to be an American, do we just kind of have to continue with the Artemis program as sort of a wasteful boondoggle as it is?No, because there are things in the Artemis program that don't even make any sense whatsoever, like the lunar orbit gateway, which is simply not necessary. The SLS (Space Launch System) as a launch vehicle is not necessary now that we have Starship. SLS made a lot of sense when it was first proposed in the late 1980s under a different name. I happen to know that because, as a young engineer, I was on the design team that did the preliminary design for what we now call SLS at Martin Marietta in 1988. And it was really just a simplification of the Space Shuttle, and if it had been developed in flying by the mid-'90s, as was entirely reasonable, it could have had a great role in giving us massively improved space capabilities over the past quarter-century. But they let this thing go so slowly that by the time it has appeared, it's obsolescent, and it's as if someone had stalled the development of the P-51 fighter plane so it wasn't available during World War I, but it's just showing up now in a world of jet fighters — this is worthless. Well, it was worth a lot in its time. SLS was worth a lot in its time, but its time was the '90s, not now.Orion doesn't really make that much sense, and the National Team lander would make sense if it was modified to be Starboat. What happened was NASA gave the contract to SpaceX to use Starship as a lunar lander, and it can be, but it's suboptimal. In any case, the National Team, which was Lockheed, and Boeing, and Blue Origin, they complained, but basically their complaint was, “We want a contract too or we won't be your friends.” And so they had sufficient political heft to get themselves a contract. The least NASA could have done is insist that the lander they were getting a contract for run on methane-oxygen, the same propellant as Starship, so Starship could service it as a tanker. Instead, they let them do their own thing and they've got a hydrogen-oxygen rocket, which makes no sense! It's like someone going to the Air Force and proposing a fighter plane that runs on propane and saying, “Well, I can make a fighter run on propane, but my tankers use jet fuel.” Air Force, being sensible, insists that all their planes run on the same fuels. They don't just let someone come along and use whatever fuel they like. So the National Team contract should be changed to a Starboat contract, and the requirements should be interoperability with Starship.The myth of an independent Mars (24:17)We go to Mars not out of despair, we go to Mars out of hope, and by establishing new branches of human civilization, they'll be able to do all sorts of things.As we finish up, I just want to quickly jump back to something you mentioned earlier about autarchy. Do you think it's possible to have a thriving, successful, sustainable Mars colony that's on its own?No. I don't think it's possible to have a thriving, successful nation on earth that's on its own. This is why I think Trump's trade war is a big mistake. It will damage our economy. Now, obviously, we can survive a trade war better than a Mars —That's what Musk is also suggesting in its whole light of consciousness that we need to be able to establish sustainable, permanent colonies elsewhere that can be just fine without a relationship with Earth.I think that's incorrect, and as you know, since you are an expert in economics, it's nonsensical. I don't think a colony of one million people would have the division of labor to build anything like an iPhone or even an iPhone battery if you think of the complexity of what is involved.There's this famous essay, “I, Pencil,” which I'm sure you're acquainted with. An economist went through all the different things that went into —Yes, Milton Friedman used that example famously. I think I get your point.iPhones are more complex than pencils. I mean, you probably could build a pencil with a million-person city, but we need to build things more complicated than that. But that's not the point here, that's not why we're going on. And I object to this. It's the Masque of the Red Death theory of how you're going to survive a plague: We'll have our castle and we can go into it and we'll be fine. No, it's extremely unattractive and it's false. The people in that castle in the Masque of the Red Death, the Edgar Allen Poe story, did not survive the plague, and it's not why we should go to Mars. We go to Mars not out of despair, we go to Mars out of hope, and by establishing new branches of human civilization, they'll be able to do all sorts of things.America developed steamboats because we needed inland transportation because the only highways we had were rivers, and so forth, and so we've been an engine of invention. Mars is going to be an engine of invention. Mars is going to want to have not just nuclear reactors, but breeder reactors, and they're going to want to have fusion power because deuterium is five times as common on Mars as it is on earth, and they're going to be electrolyzing water all the time as part of their life-support system, which means releasing hydrogen, making deuterium separation very cheap, and one could go down this kind of thing. There's all sorts of things that a Martian civilization would develop, to say nothing of the fact that a spacefaring civilization will have the capability to divert asteroids so that they don't impact the earth. So that's why we're going to Mars. We increase the creative capacity of humanity to deal with all challenges raging from asteroid impacts to epidemics.Our current timeline (27:21). . . if you have your first humans on Mars in early 2030s, I think we can have a permanent Mars base by the end of that decade . . .So let me just finish up with this, and I think as far as a justification for going to Mars, that's about the most persuasive I know, and maybe I'm an easy audience, but I'm persuaded.Let's set aside just putting an astronaut or a few astronauts on the moon and bringing them home, and let's set aside the permanent, sustainable, solo, doesn't-need-Earth colony. Just as far as having a sort of a permanent outpost, what do you think is the reasonable timeframe, both technologically and given the politics?I do think, if we do what I am arguing for, which is to make it the mission of this administration to not only just land a Starship on Mars, but land a Starship on Mars bringing a massive robotic expedition to Mars, and then following that up with several more robotic landings to Mars that prepare a base, set up the power system, et cetera, then yes, I think landing the first humans on Mars in 2033 is entirely reasonable. What the Trump administration needs to do is get this program going to the point where people look at this and say, “This is working, this is going to be great, it's already great, let's follow through.”And then, if you have your first humans on Mars in early 2030s, I think we can have a permanent Mars base by the end of that decade, by 2040, a base with 20–30 people on it. A human expedition to Mars doesn't need to grow food. You can just bring your food for a two-year expedition, and you should. You establish a base of 10 or 20 to 30, 50 people, you want to set up greenhouses, you want to be growing food. Then you start developing the technologies to make things like glass, plastic, steel, aluminum on Mars so you can build greenhouses on Mars, and you start establishing an agricultural base, and now you can support 500 people on Mars, and then now the amount of things you can do on Mars greatly expands, and as you build up your industrial and agricultural base, and of course your technologies for actually implementing things on Mars become ever more advanced, now it becomes possible to start thinking about establishing colonies.So that's another thing. Musk's idea that we're going to colonize Mars by landing 1,000 Starships on Mars, each with a hundred people, and now you've got a hundred thousand people on Mars, kind of like D-Day, we landed 130,000 men on the Normandy Beach on D-Day, and then another 100,000 the next day, and so forth. You could do that because you had Liberty Ships that could cross the English Channel in six hours with 10,000 tons of cargo each. The Starship takes eight months to get to Mars, or six, and it takes a 100 tons. You can't supply Mars from Earth. You have to supply Mars from Mars, beyond very small numbers, and that means that the colonization of Mars is not going to be like the D-Day landing, it's going to be more like the colonization of America, which started with tiny colonies, which as they developed, created the crafts and the farms, and ultimately the industries that could support, ultimately, a nation of 300 million people.On sale everywhere The Conservative Futurist: How To Create the Sci-Fi World We Were PromisedMicro Reads▶ Economics* Why the Fed's Job May Get a Lot More Difficult - NYT* America's Economic Exceptionalism Is on Thin Ice - Bberg Opinion* Trump Is Undermining What Made the American Economy Great - NYT Opinion* Don't Look to the Fed for the Answer to Stagflation - Bberg Opinion▶ Business* Inside Google's Two-Year Frenzy to Catch Up With OpenAI - Wired* Some Nvidia Customers Are OK With Older Chips - WSJ* SoftBank to Buy Ampere, a Silicon Valley Chip Start-Up, for $6.5 Billion - NYT* Nvidia CEO Says He Was Surprised That Publicly Held Quantum Firms Exist - Bberg* The promise of the fifth estate is being squeezed - FT* Boeing Beats Lockheed for Next-Gen US Fighter Jet Contract - Bberg▶ Policy/Politics* Six Ways to Understand DOGE and Predict Its Future Behavior - Cato* Government Science Data May Soon Be Hidden. They're Racing to Copy It. - NYT* Stopping Child Porn Online Is a Worthy Goal. But Beware the Proposed Cure - WSJ▶ AI/Digital* Mini-satellite paves the way for quantum messaging anywhere on Earth - Nature* The Impact of GenAI on Content Creation – Evidence from Music Videos - SSRN* AI weather forecast project eyes access through desktop computers - FT▶ Biotech/Health* Why a weight-loss drug could become a geopolitical bargaining chip - FT* We've entered a forever war with bird flu - The Verge* Doctors Told Him He Was Going to Die. Then A.I. Saved His Life. - NYT▶ Clean Energy/Climate* Inside a new quest to save the “doomsday glacier” - MIT* Glaciers are melting at record speed, says UN - Semafor▶ Robotics/AVs* Disney's Robotic Droids Are the Toast of Silicon Valley - WSJ* The fantasy of humanoid robots misses the point - FT▶ Space/Transportation* The ax has become an important part of the Space Force's arsenal - Ars* NASA Won't Let Starliner Die Just Yet, Even After Boeing's Space Fiasco - Gizmodo* How Warp Drives Don't Break Relativity - Universe Today▶ Up Wing/Down Wing* Japan Urgently Needs an AI Vibe Shift - Bberg Opinion* What left-wing critics don't get about abundance - Niskanen Center▶ Substacks/NewslettersWhat is Vibe Coding? - AI SupremacyFaster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

Very few beauty entrepreneurs have had more success than Carolyn Aronson. In 2006, the longtime hairstylist and salon owner launched professional hair-care brand It's a 10 with one hero product: Miracle Leave-In spray. The $21 formula was an immediate success for its ability to hydrate, smooth, condition, defrizz and protect hair with one formula. The brand had immediate success by seeding the product to professional hairstylists before entering Ulta Beauty, Target, Sally's Beauty, Cosmoprof, SalonCentric and Amazon, and selling DTC.  Using Miracle Leave-In as the anchor for expansion, the company added formulations through the years for various hair types and preferences. This includes new Miracle Leave-Ins for coily, blonde and men's hair; keratin- or color-treated hair; and lite, fragrance-free and dye-free variations. Each new collection includes shampoo, conditioner, masks and a variety of other offerings. The brand also sells body care.   In 2017, Aronson bought out her co-founder to become the sole owner of It's a 10. She's taken on no investors. The brand currently brings in around $500 million in gross annual sales and is distributed in more than 125 countries.  On a personal level, Aronson has also provided inspiration for women in the beauty industry. She entered the foster care system at age 2, began working in salons as a teenager and is currently one of the beauty industry's few self-made billionaires. She's also known for her philanthropy. For example, It's a 10 donated $250,000 worth of products to the Los Angeles Dream Center in January to help victims of the Los Angeles wildfires.  This year, Aronson is expanding her empire with Cloud Haircare, a new, Gen Z-focused line of shampoo, conditioner and styling products sold in two collections: nourishing and volumizing. Each SKU sells for $11.99 in CVS, Walmart and DTC.  The line features colorful, flat lay-friendly packaging and Gen Z-focused values: vegan, Leaping Bunny-approved formulas free of parabens and SLS, and sold in bottles made from post-consumer plastic resins.  Aronson's expansion into mass comes at a time when the sector has experienced a renaissance, of sorts. New, fresh brands are currently flooding the market, many of which are priced at $11.99 — like Odele, Saltair, Being Frenshe, Laura Polko and Function of Beauty —  while bargain formulas like Suave are back with new branding.  Beyond Cloud Haircare, Aronson entered the home hair-color space in 2023 with Rewind it 10, a line of men's home hair and beard dyes. She partnered with friend and rapper Fat Joe on the collection, as well as her husband Jeff Aronson. It sells for $15 per box DTC and through Sally's Beauty, CVS, Walmart, Amazon and more retailers.  To entice shoppers, each shade of hair dye is modeled by an influential figure like model Tyson Beckford, football star Trace Kelsie, DJ Khaled and celebrity face Brody Jenner, among many others.  On this week's episode of the Glossy Beauty Podcast, Aronson provides Glossy listeners an inside view of her move into mass hair care with Cloud and insights into navigating the men's marketplace with Rewind it 10. She also gives listeners a teaser on her entry into women's hair color and her hopes for Cloud Haircare.

Welcome to Open Lines for March 2025. We covered lots of topics but started out with some Space Show scheduling changes plus information regarding the upcoming probable Space Show Zoom on April 6. We covered many topics but spent most of the time on alternative plans to the Moon other than the Program of Record for Artemis using the lunar landers by SpaceX or Blue, SLS & the Gateway. We talked about the law and how much authority NASA or the President may have in modifying how we do the mission plus there was good discussion regarding the alternative plan proposed by Dr. Kothari. AJAY has discussed in ideas on TSS plus for the last time he was on, there is a PDF document that explains the details of his approach using FH and more. If you have not read that doc, please do so. Read the full summary of this program a www.thespaceshow.com when available and for this date, March 16, 2025.

In this episode, Devin and Ian interview Azoka on his recent experience winning Salt Lake Showdown 8 (2025)! Azoka walks through his preparation, major plays, the look of the meta at SLS, as well as his journey to Satellite Winner.While you're listening, jump on our Discord server, to talk more Infinity.(⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://discord.gg/4WJtJXcYjP⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠)And if you want access some cool benefits while helping us keep the show going, check out our Patreon.(⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.patreon.com/MetaChemistry⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠)

Jan Hundrieser, general manager of SLS Playa Mujeres talks with James Shillinglaw of Insider Travel Report about his new luxury resort just north of Cancun. The first luxury all-inclusive resort from SLS, this property is designed for families, couples and solo travelers. Hundrieser showcases the resort's many restaurants with diverse cuisine, a large spa, and a great pool and beach area. For more information, visit https://slshotels.com/playa-mujeres. All our Insider Travel Report video interviews are archived and available on our Youtube channel (youtube.com/insidertravelreport), and as podcasts with the same title on: Spotify, Pandora, Stitcher, PlayerFM, Listen Notes, Podchaser, TuneIn + Alexa, Podbean,  iHeartRadio,  Google, Amazon Music/Audible, Deezer, Podcast Addict, and iTunes Apple Podcasts, which supports Overcast, Pocket Cast, Castro and Castbox.

Dr. Alan Kurschner talked about a new preterist view called "Satan's Little Season." It is an amalgam of post-apocalyptic eschatology and Tartarian and Mud Flood conspiracy theories. This new breed of preterists believe that Jesus already physically returned to earth in AD 70 and the physical resurrection already occurred at that time, followed by the earthly millennial kingdom which was completed. So we are all now living during "Satan's Little Season," while Jesus and the saints are in the North Pole hidden away. The church age is entirely over, and we are waiting for that final Gog-Magog battle of Rev 20:8, at which time we will be taken up to heaven where Jesus will destroy the entire world and then we will live in heaven forever. At least, that seems to be the main version of SLS.   Monthly giving link: https://www.alankurschner.com/partner/  

Guest | Keith Cowing, Creator / Editor, NASA Watch and Astrobiology.comOn Twitter | https://x.com/keithcowingOn LinkedIn | https://www.linkedin.com/in/keith-cowing-9b94076/On Facebook | https://www.facebook.com/keith.cowingHost | Matthew S WilliamsOn ITSPmagazine  

On episode 150 of This Week in Space, it's our Listener Special edition! Not only do we answer your questions and respond to your comments, but we lined up a number of your most tummy-tickling space jokes in the humor shooting gallery. This one is more fun than wearing new shoes! Join us as we talk about asteroid 2024YR4, the Space Launch System's prospects, Katy Perry in space, the newest lunar missions, the X-37B "secret shuttle," Apollo-era flight director Gene Kranz and astronaut Buzz Aldrin, solar sails, the cage match between Elon and astronaut Andreas Morgenson, and the best meteor shower of the year! Headlines Asteroid 2024 YR4 no longer a threat - The Earth-shattering asteroid that briefly had a record high 3.2% chance of impact has been downgraded to a 1 in 20,000 risk after pre-discovery data was analyzed, sparing Barstow and the rest of Earth. SLS faces uncertain future - Even long-time supporters like Scott Pace (former National Space Council secretary) are suggesting an "off-ramp" from the SLS rocket to commercial providers, signaling a potential shift in NASA's approach to lunar missions. Lunar Trailblazer mission communication issues - The recently launched lunar orbiter briefly lost contact after launch on a Falcon 9 but has since established a heartbeat. Blue Origin announces all-female crew for NS-31 - The upcoming mission will feature singer Katy Perry, Lauren Sanchez, and four other accomplished women, marking the first all-female crew since Valentina Tereshkova's solo flight in the 1960s. Blue Ghost lunar landing imminent - Firefly Aerospace's first moon lander is scheduled to touch down on March 2nd, joining two other private landers (from Intuitive Machines and ispace) headed to the moon in the coming weeks. Listener Questions X-37B space plane purpose - The hosts discussed the secretive Space Force vehicle that's been in orbit for 908 days, likely testing technologies like hall thrusters and conducting reconnaissance. Elon Musk vs. astronauts controversy - The hosts addressed the Twitter/X confrontation between Elon Musk and astronauts (including Andreas Morgensen) regarding claims that astronauts were "stranded" on the ISS for political reasons. Gene Kranz's impact during Apollo - Rod shared his experience interviewing the legendary flight director, highlighting Kranz's "dictum" speech after the Apollo 1 fire and his transition to a more reflective persona later in life. Meeting Buzz Aldrin - The hosts described Aldrin as passionate, technically brilliant, and candid about his personal struggles, with Tariq sharing how Aldrin was the subject of his first professional space article in 1999. Solar sail technology potential - They discussed the success of Planetary Society's LightSail 2 and other solar sail missions, lamenting that the technology hasn't been utilized more extensively for deep space missions. Best meteor showers to observe - The hosts recommended the Perseids (August), Geminids (December), and Leonids (November) as the most impressive annual meteor showers, emphasizing the importance of dark skies for optimal viewing. Convincing moon landing deniers - They discussed the challenge of persuading conspiracy theorists, citing evidence including Soviet tracking confirmation and modern lunar reconnaissance photos showing Apollo landing sites. Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Download or subscribe to This Week in Space at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free shows, a members-only Discord, and behind-the-scenes access. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit

AASL President Becky Calzada shares strategies for mentoring new school librarians as as well as successful methods keeping veteran SLs in their libraries longer!    I would like to thank composer Nazar Rybak at Hooksounds.com for the music you've heard today.   Learnics Mention the podcast for 20% off a subscription Editable PD Certificate FAQ's and ISO (In search of…) Online Doctoral Programs APA format for citing a podcast/podcast app SLU Playlists Search by title, guest and location!   Becky Calzada  LinkedIn Gmail: beckycalzada15@gmail.com X: @AASLpresident Bluesky: @becalzada.bsky.social     @aaslpres.bksy.social AASL Gathering (March 13, May 14, June 11) E289 Prepared Libraries, Empowered Teams ALA Annual Conference (Philadelphia) AASL Annual Conference (St. Louis)

Guest | Keith Cowing, Editor, NASA WatchOn Twitter | https://x.com/keithcowingOn LinkedIn | https://www.linkedin.com/in/keith-cowing-9b94076/On Facebook | https://www.facebook.com/keith.cowingHost | Matthew S WilliamsOn ITSPmagazine  

PREVIEW: Colleague Bob Zimmerman connects the dots regarding news that SLS is likely to be cancelled. More later. 1953

What will we really lose in case SLS actually gets cancelled? Would nuclear rockets bring a significant enough improvement to space travel? Do we even know how to die in space? Answering all these questions and more in this Q&A show.

What will we really lose in case SLS actually gets cancelled? Would nuclear rockets bring a significant enough improvement to space travel? Do we even know how to die in space? Answering all these questions and more in this Q&A show.

Boeing is a contractor for NASA's SLS rocket that will take astronauts on the moon, but Boeing recently announced plans to lay off over 400 employees from its SLS team. Plus, one professor's experiment went for a spin on Blue Origin's recent launch of New Sheppard that mimicked lunar gravity.

Matt Berger discusses growing up in Kamploops BC, coming up in Canada, Rodney Mullen calling him after receiving his sponsor me tape, Tony Hawk saying his local park was terrible so the city built a new one, having back and hip problems and getting experimental knee surgery, how he qualified for SLS, skating for Almost then Flip skateboards, stacking footage for a new part and much more! Timestamps 00:00:00 Matt Berger 00:00:52 Is that a Monster your drinking? 00:01:16 Recovering from injury - back and hip problems 00:08:32 Experimental knee surgery 00:19:36 Olympic experience 00:30:29 Coming up in Canada 00:35:57 Tony Hawk said his local park was terrible, so the city built a new one 00:38:19 Rodney Mullen is on the phone 00:44:36 What happened with Almost? 00:52:14 Qualifying for SLS 00:57:29 What happened with Flip? 01:10:39 China spots / Barcelona spots 01:15:16 Coming out with a video part soon? 01:28:24 Matt's YouTube channel Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Jake and Anthony catch up on some news, stories they haven't covered yet like Rocket Lab's Mars Sample Return architecture, and discuss the glory of Super Bowl LIX. It's Anthony's birthday, so he will not be stopped by Jake. Go Birds.TopicsOff-Nominal - YouTubeEpisode 184 - Trickle Down Space News - YouTubeChiefs vs Eagles | Super Bowl LIX Highlights - YouTubeMars Sample Return | Rocket LabSpace Policy Edition: Mars Sample Return, but… | The Planetary SocietyCiting too much “bureaucracy,” Blue Origin to cut 10 percent of its workforce - Ars TechnicaBoeing has informed its employees of uncertainty in future SLS contracts - Ars TechnicaDOGE to examine NASA payments - SpaceNewsFollow Off-NominalSubscribe to the show! - Off-NominalSupport the show, join the DiscordOff-Nominal (@offnom) / TwitterOff-Nominal (@offnom@spacey.space) - Spacey SpaceFollow JakeWeMartians Podcast - Follow Humanity's Journey to MarsWeMartians Podcast (@We_Martians) | TwitterJake Robins (@JakeOnOrbit) | TwitterJake Robins (@JakeOnOrbit@spacey.space) - Spacey SpaceFollow AnthonyMain Engine Cut OffMain Engine Cut Off (@WeHaveMECO) | TwitterMain Engine Cut Off (@meco@spacey.space) - Spacey SpaceAnthony Colangelo (@acolangelo) | TwitterAnthony Colangelo (@acolangelo@jawns.club) - jawns.club

"PREVIEW: Colleague Bob Zimmerman discusses Boeing's challenges as the company faces potential loss of its SLS contract. More tonight." 1951

Eric Berger of Ars Technica joins me to talk about Elon Musk and the whirlwind start of the second Trump administration, and what the future may hold for SLS.This episode of Main Engine Cut Off is brought to you by 31 executive producers—Will and Lars from Agile, Fred, The Astrogators at SEE, Ryan, Stealth Julian, Warren, Joakim (Jo-Kim), Tim Dodd (the Everyday Astronaut!), David, Frank, Lee, Joonas, Josh from Impulse, Joel, Matt, Steve, Pat, Bob, Pat from KC, Theo and Violet, Better Every Day Studios, Donald, Jan, Russell, Kris, and four anonymous—and hundreds of supporters.TopicsEric Berger (@SciGuySpace) / XEric Berger | Ars TechnicaBoeing has informed its employees of uncertainty in future SLS contracts - Ars TechnicaNASA will swap Dragon spacecraft on the ground to return Butch and Suni sooner - Ars TechnicaConcern about SpaceX influence at NASA grows with new appointee - Ars TechnicaThe ShowLike the show? Support the show on Patreon or Substack!Email your thoughts, comments, and questions to anthony@mainenginecutoff.comFollow @WeHaveMECOFollow @meco@spacey.space on MastodonListen to MECO HeadlinesListen to Off-NominalJoin the Off-Nominal DiscordSubscribe on Apple Podcasts, Overcast, Pocket Casts, Spotify, Google Play, Stitcher, TuneIn or elsewhereSubscribe to the Main Engine Cut Off NewsletterArtwork photo by Blue OriginWork with me and my design and development agency: Pine Works

Episode description: Valeria presents a very unique neurological finding amidst a case of cachexia to the SLS team. Featuring: Valeria RoldanJasdeep BajwaElena StorzMukund Raguram SchemasWeight loss Abdominal distensionChronic diarrheaJoint pain thought trainIron deficiency Download CPSolvers App here RLRCPSOLVERS Click here to view the weekly episode recap email!