Hasta La Gadget!

Republican lawmakers say they have no interest in hearing more information about an attack on their workplace.

The FAA wants SpaceX to address a number of environmental concerns before it approves an expansion of the Starbase launch facility, located on Texas’s Gulf Coast. The agency asked SpaceX to make more than 75 changes — according to an environmental impact assessment released today — before the company can use the South Texas site to launch flights to the Moon and Mars. Located near Boca Chica, Texas, the launch site has been the center of controversy after SpaceX founder Elon Musk revealed his plans to incorporate the surrounding area to support lunar missions.

As Space Newsnoted, this seems to be more of a “yellow light” than a “red light” from the FAA. The agency issued a “Finding of No Significant Impact” for SpaceX’s plans to conduct orbital launches with its Starship spacecraft and Super Heavy rocket. In a nutshell, the agency found there would be no significant environmental consequences — but is asking SpaceX to take some steps to mitigate environmental harms before it is officially cleared.

The FAA’s review will only clear SpaceX for five orbital launches per year, as well as five suborbital launches and tests. Many of the proposed changes involve Boca Chica Beach, a nearby public beach that has been subject to closures during Starship tests. The closures prompted the Sierra Club and other groups to sue government officials over what they believe is a violation of the state’s constitution. SpaceX will be barred from closing the road during 18 different holidays, and will be limited to five weekend closures per year. The FAA also calls for SpaceX to limit closures to 500 hours a year for normal operations, with an added allowance of 300 hours to address any emergencies.

SpaceX seemed to take the FAA’s review in stride. “One step closer to the orbital flight test of Starship,” the company tweeted earlier today.

The world can be a dark and awful place. But as Brian and Charles so delightfully explores, the power of friendship can perform miracles, even when that friendship gets stormy at times—and even when that friendship is between a lonely inventor and the awkwardly bulky robot he crafts from random parts.

Read more…

Bugatti, the maker of one of the world’s fastest vehicles, appears to have banned Tom Cruise from buying its cars, and for a rather odd reason.

Are you the sort of music listener who’ll happily pay more for a set of earphones than you would on a nice computer? If so, Sony has the MP3 players for you. The company has released two ultra-high-end Walkman MP3 players aimed squarely at audiophiles. The headliner, the $3,700 NW-WM1ZM2 (pictured at left), mates an S-Master HX digital amp with “fine-tuned” capacitors, thick Kimber Kable (to link the amp to the headphone jack) and a 99.99 percent pure gold-plated, oxygen-free copper chassis — all of which supposedly contribute to “clear, expansive” output. Even the reflow soldering includes gold that purportedly boosts sound localization and widens the sound stage.

You can also expect more practical improvements from the Android-based player, including a larger five-inch (and finally 720p) display, a larger power supply and an improved upscaling algorithm for CD-quality (16-bit, 44/48kHz) audio. You’ll get 256GB of expandable storage for your tunes, WiFi streaming, a USB-C port and 40 hours of battery life when playing 96kHz FLAC audio. The ZM2 supports up to 32-bit, 384kHz audio in formats like MQA and WAV, so you’re more likely to be limited by your source material than your hardware.

Don’t worry if that feels excessive, as there’s also a lower-cost model… relatively speaking. The $1,400 NW-WM1AM2 (shown at right) offers much of the core functionality of the ZM2, but in an aluminum alloy body with ‘just’ a low-resistance oxygen-free copper cable. You’ll also have to make do with 128GB of expandable space.

Both Walkman models are available now. As with many devices aimed at audiophiles, there’s a question of whether or not the exotic components and materials will be noticeable in your listening experience. Moreover, you’re limited by the lowest common denominator in your setup. Even if you listen to songs that can take advantage of the design (Apple Music’s 24-bit, 192kHz hi-res lossless suddenly seems modest), you’ll have to find headphones or speakers that are up to the job. Both players are mainly aimed at wealthy music fans determined to maximize audio fidelity, even if they might not hear the difference.