A market where you bet on people dying
That uhhh seems like an assassination market
this post was submitted on 16 Feb 2026
98 points (99.0% liked)
Slop.
793 readers
524 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
That's just the healthcare industry
blowing up the NASA rocket with a big ass bomb so i can cash in on my polymarket bets 
"Imagine if these existed in the 1960s with all the assassinations.
DARPA created one for exactly that, although it was primarily focused on the middle east. Congress blocked it from going live.
Arming the Jodie Foster enjoyers with slightly larger-caliber weapons before they go off to attempt something impressive
1911 enjoyers really vindicated there.
When in doubt, don't be fools -- bring an .88 Magnum! It shoots through schools!
There are all these articles explaining to me why fueling up this rocket is so hard and why NASA just can't get it right and we should cut them some slack, but isn't this rocket essentially just a cut and shut space shuttle? Same engines, same boosters (albeit one quarter larger), same fuel and plumbing. Has NASA simply lost the expertise to handle hydrogen fuel?
I want you to build a new boat exclusively out of 40 year old spare parts for a Ford Pinto.
If I did and it was pissing fuel this much I'd be very concerned about the rest of the boat.
Yeah you probably should be it's a real piece of shit boat
but isn't this rocket essentially just a cut and shut space shuttle? Same engines, same boosters (albeit one quarter larger), same fuel and plumbing. Has NASA simply lost the expertise to handle hydrogen fuel?
The image on the left is the space shuttle. The right is the SLS leaving the same building. What are you talking about?
It uses the same engines, same fuel and same boosters, albeit they added an extension to the booster. That's what I'm talking about.
I appreciate that it's a different shape, but most of the tech is the same.
So looking at those two images, you seriously don't think that the differently shaped vehicles might have differences that affect all manner of systems?
When it comes to fueling, not really no. This thing is literally just the space shuttle flight hardware rearranged into a stack.
I have a feeling that you know better.
If they did they wouldn't be asking about it, now would they?
Could just be the case they handling cryogenic hydrogen is a colossal pain. It does fun things like diffuse through steel pipes and burn completely clear. Probably why most other launches go with methane now days.