This goes against all the hard data we’ve got from the past 80 years of the Fed independently managing interest rates, but yeah dawg, I’m sure your vibes-based economic theory has finally cracked the code that Shadow Emperor JPow has been hiding from us, and all that rampant inflation from 0% interest rates is fake news.
For the sake of argument, let’s use your numbers and say an average astronaut ends up taking a dozen flights on rockets designed to NASA’s 1-in-270 “loss of crew” standard. If that probability holds, then we would expect 4.4% of all astronauts flying in modern rockets to be in a fatal accident during their 12-mission career.
For comparison, lifetime driving fatality risk for American drivers is right around 1%.
For a more recent data point, how about NASA’s safety requirements for SpaceX manned flights, circa 2020?
Josh Finch, a NASA spokesperson, told Spaceflight Now that the agency’s calculated “Loss Of Crew” probability for SpaceX’s Demo-2 test flight is 1-in-276, exceeding the commercial crew program’s requirement threshold of 1-in-270.
Would you get in a car if you had a 1 in 270 chance of dying during each trip? Those aren’t great odds for surviving a year’s worth of daily commutes.
what are the chances that being an astronaut is actually safer than driving an hour long commute?
A trip to space is actually about 100,000 times more likely to lead to a fatality than a 20 mile car trip.
People really underestimate how dangerous space travel is.
(The math is in another comment below if you’re curious.)
Good catch! Lost track of my zeros
Are you asking to change the definition of a car trip to the ~500,000 miles it takes to get to the moon and back?
In that case, rate of fatality is around 1 in 200 “driving to the moon and back” trips. 0.5% chance. So taking the rocketship is still significantly more dangerous.
More realistically, 500,000 miles is roughly a lifetime of driving. So these astronauts are being exposed in a single trip to a fatality risk equivalent of 2+ lifetimes of driving.
Or to look at it from a different angle, 5 out of the 413 total manned space flights have ended in fatalities, or 1.21%.
Auto travel in the US has a fatality rate around 1 death per 100 million driven miles. Assuming an average trip of 20 miles, that’s 1 death per 5 million car trips, or 0.00002%.
So, roughly 10,000 (EDIT: actually 100,000, missed a zero!) times more dangerous than driving.
It is massively dangerous.
As of April 2026, a total of 791 people have flown into space and 19 of them have died in related incidents. This sets the current statistical fatality rate at 2.4 percent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spaceflight-related_accidents_and_incidents
you brought two souls in peace from a non-existence to a extremely harmful and competitive world of soft slavery
Are you okay? This characterization of life doesn’t sound like it’s coming from someone who’s in a mentally healthy headspace
Can you explain the “pressure” part a bit more? It sounds like you’ve got a time-sensitive question, but rather than asking the question and getting a response (or not), you’re asking to ask a time-sensitive question and getting a response (or not). If you’re trying to avoid the pressure of a time-sensitive question, it doesn’t seem like this approach fixes that.
Only thing I can see is that this approach prevents the situation where the recipient takes too long to respond but did actually want to go to the concert, forcing the sender to explain that it’s unfortunately too late, tickets have been purchased and they don’t have one. But it seems like clarity in the initial message is still the best way to give them a chance to respond promptly if they really do want to go.
Who knows, maybe I have finally gotten too old to understand modern youth etiquette
So if they don’t respond to your “do you have time to talk” initial message, then you just don’t invite them to the concert at all and never tell them about it?
All to avoid just asking them up-front whether they want to go or not?
That’s wild, I genuinely don’t understand how this is better in any way.
Imo if the question is urgent, either call them or add something to the text like “tickets are going quick and I’m going to buy them ASAP, so if I don’t hear back by <insert time>, I’ll assume you’re out”
I get you’re pissed that you have to wait for a train sometimes. I get it, it happens to me sometimes too. But do you really think the railroad crossing in your specific Mississippi town is the barometer upon which all transportation efficiency is measured?
Maybe your town and local trains just suck?
regular people are NOT going to spend that for a PC. Which means most of the software that’s going to be developed will target iOS and Android… and that’s it.
Were you in a coma for the last 10 years? Because it seems like you missed the part where this already came to pass many years ago.
You’ve got weirdly high expectations for a link coming from the US government.
Works for me too.
A PC is just a server in a different box. Sure, home compute may become more niche, and Best Buy and Walmart might even stop selling consumer desktop PCs. But with enough open source software and stubbornness, the option to run your own hardware isn’t going anywhere.
I would be surprised if this is still true, at least for home use. It seems like the non-gamer, non-power user segment of the PC market just switched over to tablets and smartphones instead. PCs and laptops just aren’t really necessary anymore for “normal” people who just want to check their email, watch YouTube, and surf the web.
Hold up, you’re eating unpeeled bananas? Just chomping through the skin and chewing everything up?
Is that actually a thing?
They can flood the open market with cheap bonds, meaning that when the US auctions off freshly minted bonds, they’re worth significantly less and therefore yields are significantly higher, which can lead to a death spiral of either: 1) the US has to continuously issue bonds at higher and higher yields just to pay off the previous round of bonds, 2) the Fed prints money to buy the bonds and the dollar collapses, or 3) the US just doesn’t pay, and then we’re basically back to 1 moving forward.
So yes, bond dumping can definitely fuck up the economy.
Dave’s not here man