starship remains too heavy to have any meaningful payload capacity for its size + needs to be as cheap as possible for reuse, so the incentives are to reduce cost and weight as much as possible

which could absolutely mean skimping on pressure vessel walls or tank headers

Concerning...

source here

i don't even disagree with your read on the title! i agree it's a little odd to choose one so similar, but you said further down this thread that it isn't plagiarism. I think this is yet another case of "the writer and the title author were different people with different goals"

I'm sure there are plenty of outlets that have credited you, but you have to acknowledge the perceived difference in credibility between you and, like, Bloomberg.

maybe so! i am simply saying you do not have a monopoly on the topic and that it is unreasonable to expect yourself to be credited in every discussion of CoreWeave's financials.

Yes actually! You (rightly) criticize unqualified opinions from conflicted non-experts on the subjects you cover, and yet curiously your own status as a self-described non-expert giving opinions is not relevant to your broader mainstream credibility?

i would simply not behave in a petulant and territorial way concerning tech journalism

newsrooms have standards about claims they make and sourcing and that takes time, regardless of what you may think about being right First™

historical literacy seems to be incompatible with their ideology

elon tried Gambler's Fallacy as Corporate Strategy™ and it paid off so well everyone else is now trying it

Alternatively: Bears win on game-winning field goal #5, meaning we are currently in control of the NFC North

Life is good

we just sort of have to reconcile as a society with the idea of doing things for irrational (good) reasons rather than irrational (bad and stupid) reasons

who makes that distinction? who draws the line? 🤷🤷

I think everything we do is inherently performative in some ways, but Judith Butler has a much better handle on that than I ever will